‘I have no choice’: Ombudsman warns of being ‘weaponised’ by MPs

Throughout a speech to the Australian Institute of Administrative Legislation earlier this week, Ombudsman Wayne Traces questioned whether or not a parliamentary committee ought to have ordered him to research Chapman’s conduct in refusing a timber port on Kangaroo Island – an inquiry which resulted in Traces controversially clearing her.

Traces known as for a overview of the laws which underpins his position, saying the present legal guidelines pressure him to research a matter if it falls inside his remit and is referred to him by parliament or a parliamentary committee – regardless of whether or not he believes an inquiry to be within the public’s curiosity.

In response to the Ombudsman Act, Traces “should perform an investigation into any matter referred to him” by parliament or a parliamentary committee if it falls inside his jurisdiction.

“My concern is that there’s a potential now for the Ombudsman to be weaponised,” he mentioned on Tuesday.

“Should you get the best numbers throughout the committee or inside the home, then you’ll be able to refer an allegation in opposition to a minister to an Ombudsman and principally sideline that minister at some stage in the Ombudsman’s investigation.

“They’re underneath that cloud of what’s the Ombudsman going to conclude concerning the allegation?

“That’s primarily what occurred with Ms Chapman – she was sidelined.”

It comes after a parliamentary choose committee final 12 months requested that Traces examine whether or not Chapman – in her position as then planning minister – had conflicts of curiosity when she rejected Kangaroo Island Plantation Timbers’ software to construct a $40 million port at Smith Bay, close to one in all her landholdings.

The committee, which was spearheaded by the then Labor opposition, had already discovered that Chapman had conflicts of curiosity when she made the choice – sparking an historic vote of no confidence and Chapman standing down as deputy premier and attorney-general.

She was topic to parliamentary self-discipline. In my opinion, that ought to have been left there

However legislative adjustments which handed swiftly and unanimously via parliament final 12 months meant the parliamentary committee may additionally request an Ombudsman’s investigation.

“For the very first time parliament is now capable of refer allegations of misconduct in opposition to ministers to the Ombudsman,” Traces mentioned.

“When the jurisdiction was with the ICAC (Impartial Fee Towards Corruption), there was no energy of the parliament to refer that sort of concern to the ICAC. However now, as a result of that jurisdiction has been dropped into the Ombudsman Act, the provisions round parliamentary referrals now apply to these allegations of misconduct and maladministration when it comes to public administration.

“The choose committee made full use of that.”

Traces, who in the end cleared Chapman of wrongdoing in a report handed down in Might – one month after she introduced she would give up politics – mentioned there “appeared to be a misuse of sources” as a result of the matter was already investigated earlier than it reached his desk.

He conceded Chapman took a “threat” when she rejected the port, however the choice didn’t represent a battle of curiosity.

“She knew that there have been some murmurings and beforehand in parliament there had been voices about her having a battle of curiosity and he or she made a ministerial assertion about that,” he mentioned.

“That was a political threat that she took, not an moral one from my viewpoint.

“She turned unstuck from that as a result of the political course of was adopted via the choose committee – they’d the numbers.

“She was topic to parliamentary self-discipline. In my opinion, that ought to have been left there.”

Traces mentioned by the point the matter reached his desk, Parliament had spent over $100,000 on the committee inquiry.

He mentioned whereas he welcomed referrals from parliamentary committees, “it must be on points that the committee itself has not already determined”.

“The referral provision within the Ombudsman Act obliges the Ombudsman to research, so long as it’s throughout the jurisdiction,” he mentioned.

“There’s no public curiosity standards to be met – so long as the referral pertains to a matter that’s throughout the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, I need to examine. I’ve no selection.

“I feel there’s some work to be carried out with reviewing what has occurred.”

Traces informed InDaily in Might that he believed Chapman was “exhausting done-by” on the query of battle of curiosity and that the rationale his findings have been completely different to these of the parliamentary committee’s was as a result of his investigation was longer and carried out in personal.

His report criticised the committee for its referral to him on issues on which it had already adjudicated – suggesting it had the potential to compromise the independence of his workplace.

Throughout his speech, Traces additionally revealed the federal government was in search of recommendation on altering the ministerial code of conduct.

He mentioned he understood the proposed adjustments targeted on amending the definition of a perceived battle of curiosity to embody conditions the place a minister’s buddy has a public view on a matter underneath deliberation.

It comes after Traces discovered Chapman didn’t have a non-public curiosity within the port choice, regardless of her friendship with Kangaroo Island Mayor Michael Pengilly, who was a vocal opponent of the proposed growth.

“I feel on this enviornment the place we’re speaking about public points, pals having completely different views about that concern is a part of the general public discourse and it doesn’t create a non-public curiosity,” he mentioned.

“If the federal government disagrees with me on that it’s received full management of the ministerial code of conduct and it may simply, if it needed to, enhance the element round figuring out the existence of a perceived battle of curiosity and embrace in that, that having pals with opposing views creates a non-public curiosity.

“It’s throughout the authorities’s energy to shut that loophole if it desires.

“I perceive that they’ve been taking some recommendation about that.”

However Traces mentioned altering the ministerial code of conduct in such a approach can be a “dangerous transfer”.

“I feel that will be setting the online too large and (would) create all kinds of impractical issues for ministers,” he mentioned.

A state authorities spokesperson confirmed to InDaily that the chief government of the Division of Premier and Cupboard was at the moment endeavor a overview of battle of curiosity preparations arising out of Traces’ findings within the Chapman case.

They mentioned the federal government would give “due consideration to issues raised by the Ombudsman in relation to his features”.

“The Ombudsman performs a vital position in safeguarding public integrity in South Australia,” they mentioned.