Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Lockwood: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:648;Page:16971] 
6.  
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
 to the  
Minister of Immigration 
: What specific concerns did he raise with the new chief executive of the Department of Labour when matters relating to Mary Anne Thompson and the Oughton report first came to his attention last year? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Minister of Immigration) 
: 
 I was concerned to have appropriate assurances that the proper processes had been followed in this employment matter. I was assured that the State Services Commission had been advised and that subsequently Crown Law advice had been sought. When the Oughton report was released and I saw it for the first time I raised concerns that there were further issues of public confidence and I asked the Minister of State Services to ensure that the State Services Commission’s investigation was wide enough to cover those issues. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: What precisely did the Chief Executive of the Department of Labour Christopher Blake tell the Minister when briefing him on the Oughton report on 14 December last year? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: As I have said to the member many times in the briefing I received on 14 December 2007 I was advised firstly that there had been an independent investigation into historical employment matters—that is the Oughton report—secondly that the report had concluded that Mary Anne Thompson had not sought to influence decisions about her family members’ applications for residence; and thirdly that disciplinary action had been taken against a Department of Labour employee. I was further advised that this matter had occurred under and had been dealt with and closed by previous chief executives. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: How can the public be expected to reconcile the Minister’s claim that he could not involve himself in matters related to the Oughton report because it related only to employment matters with his statement that he had expressed concerns to the Chief Executive of the Department of Labour in the expectation that his concerns would be carefully considered and could possibly lead to further follow-up action by the chief executive—how does he reconcile those two claims? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: As was appropriate under the State Sector Act I expressed concern to the chief executive; he was noted of that concern on 14 December. But I observed the law under which I was precluded—on advice that the matter was an individual employment matter—from becoming involved in the matter. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Is it correct that when the chief executive briefed the Minister on the Oughton report on 14 December last year his chief executive had not actually read the Oughton report on unlawful decision-making involving the head of the Immigration Service; if so does he consider that satisfactory performance by his chief executive? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Taking all matters into consideration including the fact that the chief executive was very new in the role— 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: How new? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
:—I think he was appointed 2 weeks before I took up the role of Minister of Immigration from memory—I believe he acted very appropriately and proactively. He took the following steps. Firstly he informed the State Services Commission; then once he had considered the report he went to the extraordinary length of seeking Crown Law advice as to whether he could if he had a mind to reopen matters; then he initiated the review of the Pacific division which he began planning in February and I believe announced in April of this year. Those are the actions in my view of a responsible chief executive. We have two inquiries pertaining to these matters—the inquiries by the State Services Commission and the Auditor-General—and the question is whether previous chief executives acted as responsibly as he did. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Does the Minister stand by his statement to Parliament on 14 May that when he was briefed on 14 December 2007 by the chief executive he expressed his concerns to him which the chief executive took seriously advising the Minister that he himself was looking into the matter; if so how seriously was his chief executive looking into the matter at that time when he had not actually even bothered to read the Oughton report—and did not read it until there was public inquiry through Official Information Act requests for it? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I would surmise that a new chief executive coming into a role and being advised—because an Official Information Act request had come through as the member rightly says—that a matter that had occurred under previous chief executives— 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: You would think he read it. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: —if I could continue—had been examined by an independent report which had concluded what I have previously stated to the member and had then been closed would at that time make the judgment that he did because it was at that point a historic matter. But as I have just said to the member the chief executive had already at the point when he briefed me contacted the State Services Commission. He had then sought once he had considered the report Crown Law advice as to whether he could reopen the matter and he then initiated a review of the Pacific branch. I repeat to the member that I believe that those are appropriate responsible and serious actions of a chief executive. The Auditor-General and the State Services Commission will determine the appropriateness or lack of appropriateness of the actions of previous chief executives. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Was the third recommendation of the Oughton report which was that further investigation was needed into the issue of staff being instructed to make decisions they regarded as breaches of policy ever actioned; if so by whom and when? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I am advised that as I have said to the member the chief executive took it upon himself to look into all those matters and in terms of the Pacific branch review and the other actions taken by the chief executive that I have outlined to the member the actions or lack of actions pertaining to the Oughton report will be examined in full not only through the Pacific branch review but through the inquiries by the Audit Office and the State Services Commission. 
Taito Phillip Field 
: Could the Minister clarify for this House that only the Minister of Immigration or the Associate Minister of Immigration can make decisions outside policy and that the decision in the case being questioned was made by an official who was then disciplined in relation to that report for that decision? Could the Minister clarify whether that is true and does it contradict the answer that Dr Cullen gave to me a few weeks ago that there is a possibility of an official making decisions under a delegation from the Minister? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: The powers of the Minister and the Associate Minister are delegated to officials yes and officials have delegated authority— 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: Apart from granting residency. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: —Dr Lockwood Smith anticipates my answer and he is correct—apart from the granting of residency. Those decisions are made by my colleague the Associate Minister and me. 
Taito Phillip Field 
: Is it true that the Minister made a statement to a select committee this morning that made it clear that the making of those decisions is confined to the Minister of Immigration and the Associate Minister of Immigration—not officials? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: I will try again: the granting of residence is not delegated. That power is conferred on the Minister and the Associate Minister yes.