King Annette: Protected Disclosures Amendment Bill — First Reading 
King Annette: Protected Disclosures Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:12420] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of State Services) 
: 
 I move  
That the Protected Disclosures Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
 I propose to refer the bill to the Government Administration Committee. I realise that some people are off to put their jamies on but this is a very important first reading. This bill is short. It is designed to build on the current purposes of the principal Act which are to promote the public interest by facilitating the disclosure and investigation of serious wrongdoing in or by an organisation and to protect employees who in accordance with the Act make such disclosures. 
The bill has two parts. Part 1 contains amendments to the Protected Disclosures Act 2000 and Part 2 contains a transitional provision. 
In December 2003 Trevor Mallard the then Minister of State Services tabled a report in the House on the Act’s first few years. The report was prepared by Mary Scholtens QC. It concluded that the Act had not been used a great deal and that it had not always been used well. Without a central coordinator the range of appropriate authorities to which employees disclosed was confusing. Some disclosures fell between the gaps in the jurisdictions of those authorities. 
Ms Scholtens also referred to a strong perception amongst some of those consulted on the Act that the identity of the whistle-blower employee would not be protected. Ms Scholtens concluded that the Ombudsman could assist whistle-blowers coordinate referrals between appropriate authorities and guide and review the Act’s operation. 
The Protected Disclosures Amendment Bill gives the Ombudsman that enhanced role. It also picks up on a number of other recommendations designed to improve the Act’s protection and processes. 
 The Ombudsman will be authorised to provide information and guidance to public or private sector employees on using the Act at any time not just on request. For example the Ombudsman will advise on what is serious wrongdoing and on whom to complain to. This should provide a filter for misguided disclosures as well as encourage whistle-blowers to throw light on serious wrongdoing. 
Public sector organisations are required to have internal procedures on how disclosures must be made and on how disclosures will be investigated. The Act requires that whistle-blowers must first— 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Have a whistle! 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: —disclose in accordance with their employing organisation’s internal procedures. I am sorry did the member have a comment? 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: A sensible one. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: It was a sensible comment? 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Indeed. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Well it did not sound sensible but I am pleased he had a comment. No doubt he will take a call on this bill straight after me. The Act requires that whistle-blowers must first disclose in accordance with their employing organisation’s internal procedures but complying with internal procedures can be difficult if there are none. New section 6C empowers the Ombudsman to request the internal procedures and related information from the organisation concerned. As a result organisations may be encouraged to have a good effective protected disclosure policy in place. Employees’ confidence should also increase if they know what the employing organisation’s internal procedures are. 
The Ombudsman will also have new powers to review and guide public sector organisation investigations of whistle-blowing under new section 15B. The power to guide investigations is facilitative rather than directive and the power will be activated either on the organisation’s request or at the Ombudsman’s discretion. That should help to prevent disclosures of serious wrongdoing from circulating around various agencies without resolution. 
Currently the Ombudsman may make reports to Parliament under section 29 of the Ombudsmen Act. The bill provides for a new section 15C of the Protected Disclosures Act which specifies a number of matters on which the Ombudsmen may report about the exercise of their powers under the Protected Disclosures Act. The list includes the number and type of inquiries made to the Ombudsman under the Act. This list is designed to provide Parliament with more information on how the Act is operating and on how the Ombudsmen are carrying out their powers. 
These new sections just described come with information-requiring powers conferred by new section 15E(3). The Ombudsman will be able to require information from public sector organisations in keeping with current limits on their investigative jurisdiction. Private sector organisations will not be required to comply but will be encouraged to do so. 
In-built protections from misuse of such powers are already in the Ombudsmen Act and in this bill. Under new section 15A the Ombudsman will be able to take over a public sector organisation investigation of serious wrongdoing alleged against it. The triggers are that the Ombudsman considers that insufficient progress has been made by the organisation and that the whistle-blower consents to the takeover. The Ombudsman may also investigate in conjunction with the organisation. 
In addition the Ombudsman will be able to take on a coordinating role under new section 15 in relation to protected disclosures that have already been made to another person or body. This again applies only with the whistle-blower’s consent in exceptional circumstances such as urgency. An Ombudsman may refer the disclosure on to an appropriate authority or to the Minister to investigate. Alternatively she or he may investigate when the matter relates to a public sector organisation. 
The bill extends the Act to a wider range of people and bolsters the Act’s protection. The term “employee” will include volunteers who work for no reward. Board members and members of local authorities will be able to whistle-blow under the Act. Both groups will be considered employees for the purposes of confidentiality of identity immunity from liability and anti-victimisation protections in the Human Rights Act. Contractors are already covered by the Act. 
Even with the protection of the Act whistle-blowing carries some personal risk to the employees. 
Debate interrupted.