❓ Mr Brown questions the Minister for Public Sector Management regarding breaches of public sector standards within the Health Department, revealing several investigations and breaches, some of which were not acted upon due to disagreement from the Commissioner of Health.
AnsweredQoN 578Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
578. Mr BROWN to the Minister for Public Sector Management:
(1) How many enquiries has the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards -
(a) commenced; or
(b) conducted; or
(c) concluded, into matters concerning the Health Department since 1 July 1998?
(2) Did any of the enquiries reveal any breaches of the standards under the Public Sector Management Act 1994?
(3) If so, what did each breach relate to?
(4) What -
(a) was the precise nature of each breach; and
(b) actions have been taken to rectify each breach?
(5) Where a breach is found by the Commissioner or one of his investigators, does the Department ensure people involved in committing the breach and those affected by the breach are advised
that -
(a) a breach has been found; and
(b) the remedy that has been recommended or implemented?
(6) If not, why not?
(7) Are those who are found to have breached the standards -
(a) afforded the opportunity to comment on any findings; and
(b) advised of the remedy to be taken?
(8) Are those who have been affected by one or more others breaching the standards -
(a) given an opportunity to comment on any findings; and
(b) advised of any remedy taken?
(9) With respect to (8)(a) and (b) above, if not, why not?
(10) Are there any reports or findings from the Commissioner or any of his officers that have not been dealt with and/or acted upon?
(11) If so -
(a) what breaches have not been acted on; and
(b) when will they be acted on?
(12) Has the Department decided against or failed to take any action on proven breaches on the standards?
(13) Is it true that the Department has declined to take action on breaches of the standards to protect those involved in making poor decisions and/or to avoid the Department's reputation being tarnished or indeed any embarrassment over the Departments failure?
(14) Is it also true that some individuals involved or affected by such breaches have been pressured by the Department to remain silent and/or take no action on one or more breaches?
(1) How many enquiries has the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards -
(a) commenced; or
(b) conducted; or
(c) concluded, into matters concerning the Health Department since 1 July 1998?
(2) Did any of the enquiries reveal any breaches of the standards under the Public Sector Management Act 1994?
(3) If so, what did each breach relate to?
(4) What -
(a) was the precise nature of each breach; and
(b) actions have been taken to rectify each breach?
(5) Where a breach is found by the Commissioner or one of his investigators, does the Department ensure people involved in committing the breach and those affected by the breach are advised
that -
(a) a breach has been found; and
(b) the remedy that has been recommended or implemented?
(6) If not, why not?
(7) Are those who are found to have breached the standards -
(a) afforded the opportunity to comment on any findings; and
(b) advised of the remedy to be taken?
(8) Are those who have been affected by one or more others breaching the standards -
(a) given an opportunity to comment on any findings; and
(b) advised of any remedy taken?
(9) With respect to (8)(a) and (b) above, if not, why not?
(10) Are there any reports or findings from the Commissioner or any of his officers that have not been dealt with and/or acted upon?
(11) If so -
(a) what breaches have not been acted on; and
(b) when will they be acted on?
(12) Has the Department decided against or failed to take any action on proven breaches on the standards?
(13) Is it true that the Department has declined to take action on breaches of the standards to protect those involved in making poor decisions and/or to avoid the Department's reputation being tarnished or indeed any embarrassment over the Departments failure?
(14) Is it also true that some individuals involved or affected by such breaches have been pressured by the Department to remain silent and/or take no action on one or more breaches?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
14 November 2000
Response time
70 days
The Minister Replied:
I am advised:
(1)
(a) 13
(b) 13
(c) 11
(2) Yes
(3) Compliance Area - Number
Recruitment, Selection and Appointment Standard - 4
Section 9(b) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 - 1
Section 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 - 1
(4)(a)
Recruitment, Selection and Appointment Standard - Number
1.4 Selection methods and their application are free from bias, patronage and nepotism - 2
1.7 Decisions and processes embody the principles of natural justice - 1
1.9 Appropriate confidentiality is observed - 1
Sections 9(b) and 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 - 2
A former employee of the Health Department of Western Australia complained that his personal file had been given to external legal counsel representing the Health Department of Western Australia in a case before the Equal Opportunity Tribunal.
It was alleged that the purpose of doing so was to provide information to intimidate another person (a Health Department of Western Australia employee), who was a witness at the Tribunal hearing. It was further alleged that Health Department of Western Australia covertly altered documentation on the complainant's personal file concerning his contract of service.
After an extensive inquiry, the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards found no evidence to support the allegation that the Health Department of Western Australia had inappropriately altered the complainant's contract of service.
On the other allegation about the misuse of the complainant's personal file and the time taken to deal with his original complaint, the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards found that the Health Department of Western Australia had not complied with sections 9(b) and (c) of the Act.
(4b) The breaches of the Recruitment, Selection and Appointment Standard (four in total) were related to two reviews. The action taken as a result of the first review was to re-advertise the position. The action taken as a result of the second review was to offer appointment to the position to the applicant who was ranked first by the selection panel. Action taken in relation to both reviews were in accordance with the Independent Reviewers recommendations.
The breaches of Sections 9(b) and 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 (two in total) were related to one review. The Commissioner of Health disagreed with the findings of a breach of Sections 9(b) and 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 and therefore no action has been taken.
(5a-b) Yes, where a breach has been found, those involved in committing the breach and those affected by the breach are notified that a breach has been found. They are advised on the remedy that has been recommended or implemented.
(6) Not applicable.
(7a-b) Yes, those who are found to have breached the standards are provided with a copy of the Independent Reviewers Report for consideration and afforded the opportunity to comment on any findings and recommendations. They are advised of the remedy to be taken by the Department.
(8a-b) Yes, those who have been affected by one or more others breaching the standards are notified in writing that a breach has been found and given an opportunity to comment on any findings. The letter includes details on the remedy that has been recommended and action taken.
(9) Not applicable.
(10) Yes.
(11)(a) Breach of sections 9(b) and (c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994.
(11)(b) The Commissioner of Health disagreed with the findings of a breach of Sections 9(b) and 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994, therefore no action will be taken at this stage.
(12) Yes. The Commissioner of Health subsequently informed the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards on the finding of a breach of sections 9(b) and (c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 that he disagreed. After examining the Commissioner of Health's comments, the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards adhered to his original finding.
(13) No; it is not true that the Department has declined to take action on breaches of the standards to protect those involved in making poor decisions and/or to avoid the Department's reputation being tarnished or any embarrassment over the Department's failure.
(14) No; it is not true that some individuals involved or affected by such breaches have been pressured by the Department to remain silent and/or take no action on one or more breaches.
I am advised:
(1)
(a) 13
(b) 13
(c) 11
(2) Yes
(3) Compliance Area - Number
Recruitment, Selection and Appointment Standard - 4
Section 9(b) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 - 1
Section 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 - 1
(4)(a)
Recruitment, Selection and Appointment Standard - Number
1.4 Selection methods and their application are free from bias, patronage and nepotism - 2
1.7 Decisions and processes embody the principles of natural justice - 1
1.9 Appropriate confidentiality is observed - 1
Sections 9(b) and 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 - 2
A former employee of the Health Department of Western Australia complained that his personal file had been given to external legal counsel representing the Health Department of Western Australia in a case before the Equal Opportunity Tribunal.
It was alleged that the purpose of doing so was to provide information to intimidate another person (a Health Department of Western Australia employee), who was a witness at the Tribunal hearing. It was further alleged that Health Department of Western Australia covertly altered documentation on the complainant's personal file concerning his contract of service.
After an extensive inquiry, the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards found no evidence to support the allegation that the Health Department of Western Australia had inappropriately altered the complainant's contract of service.
On the other allegation about the misuse of the complainant's personal file and the time taken to deal with his original complaint, the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards found that the Health Department of Western Australia had not complied with sections 9(b) and (c) of the Act.
(4b) The breaches of the Recruitment, Selection and Appointment Standard (four in total) were related to two reviews. The action taken as a result of the first review was to re-advertise the position. The action taken as a result of the second review was to offer appointment to the position to the applicant who was ranked first by the selection panel. Action taken in relation to both reviews were in accordance with the Independent Reviewers recommendations.
The breaches of Sections 9(b) and 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 (two in total) were related to one review. The Commissioner of Health disagreed with the findings of a breach of Sections 9(b) and 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 and therefore no action has been taken.
(5a-b) Yes, where a breach has been found, those involved in committing the breach and those affected by the breach are notified that a breach has been found. They are advised on the remedy that has been recommended or implemented.
(6) Not applicable.
(7a-b) Yes, those who are found to have breached the standards are provided with a copy of the Independent Reviewers Report for consideration and afforded the opportunity to comment on any findings and recommendations. They are advised of the remedy to be taken by the Department.
(8a-b) Yes, those who have been affected by one or more others breaching the standards are notified in writing that a breach has been found and given an opportunity to comment on any findings. The letter includes details on the remedy that has been recommended and action taken.
(9) Not applicable.
(10) Yes.
(11)(a) Breach of sections 9(b) and (c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994.
(11)(b) The Commissioner of Health disagreed with the findings of a breach of Sections 9(b) and 9(c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994, therefore no action will be taken at this stage.
(12) Yes. The Commissioner of Health subsequently informed the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards on the finding of a breach of sections 9(b) and (c) of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 that he disagreed. After examining the Commissioner of Health's comments, the Commissioner for Public Sector Standards adhered to his original finding.
(13) No; it is not true that the Department has declined to take action on breaches of the standards to protect those involved in making poor decisions and/or to avoid the Department's reputation being tarnished or any embarrassment over the Department's failure.
(14) No; it is not true that some individuals involved or affected by such breaches have been pressured by the Department to remain silent and/or take no action on one or more breaches.
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.