Worth Richard:  
Worth Richard:  
[Volume:622;Page:17321] 
RICHARD WORTH (National—Epsom) 
: 
 The public service of this country has a high reputation for integrity and honesty in its dealings with Governments of the day and with the public it serves. It therefore gives me no satisfaction to inform members of this House that a department under the stewardship of the Minister of Labour is placing this reputation at risk. 
During the past 2 months I have questioned the Minister about the activities of a private company Twywell Technology Ltd that is involved in the management of the department’s information technology requirements. Those questions have provoked a flood of deeply disturbing information from within the public service. My informants reflect two common elements—one is fear and the other is grave concern for the reputation of the department and its administrative practices. There is a fear of disclosure of identity intimidation unprofessional behaviour and retaliation damaging to their reputations their jobs and their ability to work in future with the department and other State sector agencies. They are concerned brave people. Even more disturbingly those informants assert that answers provided by the Minister to the questions I have asked of him have been misleading that they fall short of portraying the full picture of the relationships that have developed between Twywell Technology Ltd and officials of the department over the past 7 years. 
Members should be aware that the activities of Twywell Technology Ltd and its owner and director Maxine Margaret Welsh within this department do not involve small amounts of money. According to the Minister since 1997 the department has paid this company some $8.4 million—an average in excess of $1.2 million a year. Its staff numbers appear to vary between two and seven at any one time. During this period Twywell Technology Ltd has according to the Minister provided management and facility services and carried out numerous specific project management roles. The more projects it recommends and has accepted as necessary the more work it generates for itself across all these areas. 
 It holds therefore a powerful position requiring the utmost integrity. But the activities carried out by Twywell as described by the Minister demonstrate the existence of conflicts of interest that are difficult to resolve in view of the status of Twywell as a contractor to the department. 
It is not surprising in view of the list of activities the company is said by the Minister to carry out that there are claims it has cost the department on occasions more to have Twywell involved in a project than the cost of the services or products provided by contracted vendors. Members should also know that the director of Twywell Technology Ltd was involved in establishing nominee companies—so that the beneficial ownership of such companies was hidden—to carry out work for the department. The work undertaken in one case and set up for undertaking in another case according to the answers from the Minister involved Twywell in setting specifications assessing the validity of a tender process and managing the projects. So it was that the sole director of Twywell set up a company called Da Vinci Integration. In December 2001 Da Vinci Integration was a “request for proposals” recipient. Who was to evaluate those requests? It was none other than Twywell—a gross conflict of interest and breach of faith. So it was also that Knight Technology International Ltd another nominee Twywell company provided services to the department from April 2002 to June 2002. 
The department through the Minister has said it is not aware of reputable information technology companies taking steps to withdraw their services or refusing to become involved with the department. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The time for the debate has concluded— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know that this is very unusual but I noted that the member had not quite finished his speech which I think was a relatively important one. If he had only a minute or two to go the Government would not oppose his seeking leave to finish that minute or two. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to that course being followed? There is not. The member can finish his speech. 
RICHARD WORTH 
: I was saying that the department through the Minister has said it is not aware of reputable information technology companies taking steps to withdraw their services or refusing to become involved with the department because of the activities of Twywell. I am advised of a number that withdrew their services and will have nothing to do with the department because of dissatisfaction with Twywell. 
Questions relate to the relationship between Twywell and providers of products and services over finders’ fees the handling of invoices and the extent to which the department paid the true costs of contracted work. I referred earlier to fear and intimidation. Members might like to know what those with a close knowledge of Twywell’s activities within the department have to say. They refer to greedy and unethical behaviour unprofessional behaviour while representing the department unprofessional relationships with senior members of the department and verbal abuse of suppliers and staff that becomes intimidatory. 
It is an ugly picture consistent with fraud and corruption. There is an urgent need for investigation of these issues and I suggest two courses of action. The first is an immediate inquiry by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. Such an inquiry should show whether an examination of the situation by the Serious Fraud Office is appropriate. The second is an immediate investigation by the Audit Office. I am grateful to the House for giving me leave to complete those comments. 
The debate having concluded the motion lapsed.