❓ Mr Rundle questions the Attorney General about actions taken following concerns raised regarding the Public Trustee and the Auditor General's report. The Attorney General defends the government's position, highlighting historical context and ongoing reviews.
AnsweredQoN 461Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
PUBLIC TRUSTEE —
INVESTIGATION
461. Mr P.J. RUNDLE to the Attorney General:
I
refer to my question of 17 March regarding the Public Trustee, and the
confronting findings in the Auditor General's performance audit
of the Public Trustee that was tabled today.
(1) What actions did the Attorney General personally
take to investigate the performance of the Public Trustee after I raised
these concerns five months ago?
(2) Will the Attorney General commit to directing the
Public Trustee to implement in full all the recommendations of the
Auditor General's report, as a matter of urgency, to regain public
trust?
INVESTIGATION
461. Mr P.J. RUNDLE to the Attorney General:
I
refer to my question of 17 March regarding the Public Trustee, and the
confronting findings in the Auditor General's performance audit
of the Public Trustee that was tabled today.
(1) What actions did the Attorney General personally
take to investigate the performance of the Public Trustee after I raised
these concerns five months ago?
(2) Will the Attorney General commit to directing the
Public Trustee to implement in full all the recommendations of the
Auditor General's report, as a matter of urgency, to regain public
trust?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the
member for the question.
(1)–(2) The
Auditor General handed down a performance audit today, and we are very relieved
and pleased that, in that performance audit, she has not identified any
malfeasance or impropriety in the handling of any particular estate. The
Auditor General identified the fee structure within the Public Trustee as
requiring review, and has recommended that the Treasury conduct that review,
and it will be conducted.
There is some history to this. One of
the recommendations is to put back in place a board of governance. The board of
governance was originally instituted in 1997 by the Court government in
preparation for selling and privatising the Public Trustee office—to
take it out of government control and take it beyond the purview of the Auditor
General. In 2002, to stop the privatisation by a conservative government of
this important state office, the Gallop government dispensed with the board of
governors because it did not want this preparatory work for the sale of the
Public Trustee to occur. The Court government wanted to privatise everything:
Western Power, hospital services, the lot. The taking away of the board of
governors was a step for keeping the Public Trustee within state hands, and
that is a policy question, not for the Auditor General.
The Auditor General said that the fee
structure in the Public Trustee—that is, fees for service rather than
for time spent on producing a service—is wrong, but the fee structure
was put in place by the Treasury in 2012, during the Barnett government years.
The government and the Public Trustee are quite happy that this performance
audit has been undertaken, and pleased that there has been no report of
defalcation or misconduct within the office.
The government accepts the finding that there should be a review of the way in which the fees are charged by the Under Treasurer. We accept that, and that
will happen.
I also note—the government
wants to stress this—that the Auditor General notes —
I would like to recognise that we
found Public Trustee staff work hard to fulfill their duties, often in trying
circumstances. Caseloads are high, particularly in the trusts area, and the
work can be mentally and emotionally demanding.
It was the Treasurer—our
esteemed Premier—who, in the last budget, budgeted for more staff to go
into the office of the Public Trustee.
We thank the Auditor General for
looking at these fee structures and other matters. The government will not necessarily accept all its recommendations—for
example, the recommendation that the government start publicly funding
the Public Trustee. The whole review of the Public Trustee by the previous
government was to have a self-funded Public
Trustee, and we cannot do that without charging fees. If people do not like the fees, they can complain, or those who
can afford it can go to another trustee. But these fees were not set by
the government; the fee structure was recommended under the previous government
by the Under Treasurer. We thank the Auditor
General for her report and for drawing these matters to the attention of
the government.
member for the question.
(1)–(2) The
Auditor General handed down a performance audit today, and we are very relieved
and pleased that, in that performance audit, she has not identified any
malfeasance or impropriety in the handling of any particular estate. The
Auditor General identified the fee structure within the Public Trustee as
requiring review, and has recommended that the Treasury conduct that review,
and it will be conducted.
There is some history to this. One of
the recommendations is to put back in place a board of governance. The board of
governance was originally instituted in 1997 by the Court government in
preparation for selling and privatising the Public Trustee office—to
take it out of government control and take it beyond the purview of the Auditor
General. In 2002, to stop the privatisation by a conservative government of
this important state office, the Gallop government dispensed with the board of
governors because it did not want this preparatory work for the sale of the
Public Trustee to occur. The Court government wanted to privatise everything:
Western Power, hospital services, the lot. The taking away of the board of
governors was a step for keeping the Public Trustee within state hands, and
that is a policy question, not for the Auditor General.
The Auditor General said that the fee
structure in the Public Trustee—that is, fees for service rather than
for time spent on producing a service—is wrong, but the fee structure
was put in place by the Treasury in 2012, during the Barnett government years.
The government and the Public Trustee are quite happy that this performance
audit has been undertaken, and pleased that there has been no report of
defalcation or misconduct within the office.
The government accepts the finding that there should be a review of the way in which the fees are charged by the Under Treasurer. We accept that, and that
will happen.
I also note—the government
wants to stress this—that the Auditor General notes —
I would like to recognise that we
found Public Trustee staff work hard to fulfill their duties, often in trying
circumstances. Caseloads are high, particularly in the trusts area, and the
work can be mentally and emotionally demanding.
It was the Treasurer—our
esteemed Premier—who, in the last budget, budgeted for more staff to go
into the office of the Public Trustee.
We thank the Auditor General for
looking at these fee structures and other matters. The government will not necessarily accept all its recommendations—for
example, the recommendation that the government start publicly funding
the Public Trustee. The whole review of the Public Trustee by the previous
government was to have a self-funded Public
Trustee, and we cannot do that without charging fees. If people do not like the fees, they can complain, or those who
can afford it can go to another trustee. But these fees were not set by
the government; the fee structure was recommended under the previous government
by the Under Treasurer. We thank the Auditor
General for her report and for drawing these matters to the attention of
the government.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.