rJflrto/oro39 John-f'aul Langbroek nu, Leader of the Opposition Leader ofthe IilP g\rMEANp Mrscb-NDGf RECEIVED Hon.Martin Moynihan QC Chairman 25 JAN?010 Crimeand Misconduct Commission GPOBox 3123 COMMISSION BrisbaneQtd 4001 22ndJanuarv 2010 DearMr Moynihan, Re. Reviewof Ministerial office/public serviceInteraction I write to you in responseto an invitationfrom yourpredecessor seeking submissions on how to makeinteractions betrveenMinisterial staff and puUti. servantsmore professional and transparentin Queensland. one of thegreat difficulties all interestedparties face in respondingto the CMC,scall for submissionsis that tle CJviC'shearings into the conductof oneformer Ministerial staffer, q"hichhave prompted callsfor thesesubmissions, have been just that:hearings into the conductofjust oneministerial stafferin oneministerial office duringons year relating to just onedepartment. on currentestimates, ]her9 3ret 217fulltime equivalentMinisterial staffof which 34 are basedin thePremier's officealone. Yet of these217 staffporitionr, the CMC,s public hearingsexplored the conductofjust oneformer ministerial staJfer. This is not an adequate sizedexploration upon which the trueextent of problemscan be identified;upon which truly informedsubmissions can be !5.0, or uponwhich the public cangauge the full culturethat existsamongst Ministerial staffersarising out of their interactionana JonOuct with public servants. Failureof cMC to interviewperson chargedwith responsibilityfor conductof Ministeriatstsff Additionally,I wouldlike to drawyour attentionto the fact thatthe CMC,shearings into the allegedmisconduct of Mr simon Tutt neveronce sought to interviewthe premier,s chief of staff eventhough the Premier personally 'role appointedand indentified her chief of staff asbeing a model'for IW.Tutt'sconduct (andthat of all othersenior ministerial staff; andwho Premieridentified as the beingthe overseerof Ministeti"rriumng includingttr"i.perrormance andmanagement. PageI of5 Addressr ParliamentHouse Alice Srreet Brisbane Queensland 4000 Ausrralia Telephone (07) 34067997 Facsinile $7) 3221 1496 Emril3 [email protected] Page2 of5 I havesupplied you with this newand additional information - confirmedin thePremier's ownhand witing - andseek your urgent consideration to re-openhearings to furtherexplore theexpectations and conduct of all Ministerialstaff so that public submissions are based on a fulI andproper understanding and insight into the currentinteractions between ministerial staffand public servants. Manyof thepractices of Ministerialstafl the expectationsplaced upon them by thePremier's office;and the scrutinyto whichthe Premier and Premier's office appliesto ministerialstaff arekept secret and have not beenexplored and exposed by eitherthe CMC's publichearings or a RoyalCommission. All Ministerialstaff are contracted to theDepartment of Premierand Cabinet with the Premier asthe responsible Minister. The CMC has not, as a partof its publichearings, yet questioned thePremier on how shemonitors - or putsin placethe processes to monitorthrough the Chief ExecutiveOfficer - the conductof Ministerialstaff and the expectationsand guidelines the Premier'sDepartment places on ministerialstaff and their conduct and interaction with public servants. Moreimportantly, inNovember2}}T the Premier approved a salaryincrease of over $100,000 for her Chiefof Staff- takingthe salarypackage to $31 I ,502.The Premier based herrecommendation upon the recommendationsof a briefingnote provided by her Departmentwbjch clearly said (underlining is mine): "TheChief of Staffoversees stffing andother resourcingfor all Queensland MinisterialQffices and acts as a mentorto kqt senioradvisors in otltero-ffices" 'primary Additionally,the duties'of thePremier's Chief of Staff- asendorsed by the Premier herself- include: "Coordinateand over$ee. all Ministerialstqff, including recruitment and gtqf pe\fornancemanagement, development of appropriateperformqnce standards and st a.f; dev eI opment pr oc es s e s " . Yet at no stageduring the CMC'spublic hearings has the Premier's Chief of Staffor the Premierbeen asked to explainhow Mr Tutt andother Ministerial staff are advised of, and monitoredon, performance standards and staff development processes. Again, without these issuesbeing explored in the publicdomain, it is hardto seehow publicsubmissions to improvethe conduct and interaction of Ministerialstaff can be madeon an informedbasis. Despitethis being clearly articulated as the Premier's Chief of Staffs role- anddespite it beingclearly endorsed by the Premieras her Chiefof Staff s role (thebriefing note contains thePremier's signature of approval)- the CMC is yet to call thePremier's then Chief of Staff Page3 of5 to explainwhat oversight, training and guidance he providedto Ministerialstaff including Mr SimonTutt andothers. Equally,the Premier agreed to the salaryincrease for her Chiefof Staffon the basisthat the 'mentor personshe chose to holdthat position acts as a keysenior advisers 'which for in other ffices wouldpresumably have to includethe senioradviser of the Ministerfor Police. Yetthe CMC is yetto call thePremier before its public hearingsto askher to explainwhat sortof mentorshe was providing, and what sort of cultureshe was fostering amongst Ministerialstafl whenshe appointed as her Chiefof Staff a formerLabor Party State Secretaryand a formerLabor party MP, forcedto resignin disgrace,after confessing to electoralroll fraud. 'mentor' If this is the whomthe Premier has handpicked for staffin otherMinisterial offices, is it little wonderthat those ministerial staff believe that the politicalinterests of the Labor Parfy'selection campaign are of greaterpriority thanthe collectiveinterests of Queenslandets,and is it little wonderthat those staff would subscribeto a view of "whatever 'mentol' meansnecessary" given the thePremier has handpicked for them? I haveattached for yourinformation the Premier'sbriefing note to whichI referbecause it seemsextraordinary that during the CMC's publichearings to date,it hasnot calledbefore it thevery person who the Premierhas chosen and identified as the overseerand role modelfor Mr Tutt at thetime of his meetingswith the QRU; at the time of his meetingswith public servantsand at thetime of the QRUgrant being approved. Giventhe above,I seekthe CMC's confirmationthat it will call Mr Mike Kaiser(the Premier'sChief of Staffat thetime) and the Premier herself to appearat a publichearing to giveexplanation and elaboration on the aboveissues and to allow submissionsto remainopen until a clearerand broader picture ofcurrenl interactions and expectations is put into the publicdomain. In theevent that the CMC doesnot call to a publichearing the very personwho the Premier hashandpicked as being a'mentor' for Mr Tutt andother ministerial staff andthe very 'oversees' personthat the Premier has confirmed all Ministerialstaff and is responsiblefor performancestandards and staff development, then I would appreciatean explanationas to howthis cannotbe relevant to eithera. theconduct of the formerstaffer or b. areviewof the conductand interactions of Ministerialstaff with public servants. Failureto conductsuch hearings would, in my submission,undermine any confidencein any conclusionor recommendationthe CMC mightmake in relationto this matter. Page4 of 5 InappropriateInfluence: it hassought comment on Additionally,as a partof the CMC's call for publicsubmissions, a requestor directionfrom ,,howmay public seryants be empoweredto ihopung, or question ' theminiitir's ffice thatthey consider to beinappropriate" staff it canbe difficult' if Unlessthere is transparencyabout the background of Ministerial if a requestis appropriateor not impossible,for a publicservant to even"beginto know inappropriate. interestand scrutiny of therole of For example,in recentmonths there has been much public qo.ttlons alsobeen asked about what sort lobbyistsin, andwith, the StateGovernm"ni- have thenchange occupation to safeguardshave been put in placeto ensrne]-obbyists who of providefavour to their becomea Ministerialstaffer, do not deliberatelyorinadvertently 'successfees" by facilitating formerclients, or petson'swho hadpaid them so-called servants'This issuewas preferentialaccess, fri"fing, etcwiti Ministersand or publlc p.;i;;;r staff andtwo Deputychief s of staff underlinedlast year when dl ortl. ahief of hadeach previously worked for a lobbyistfirm' decisions'.andinfluencing To ensureMinisterial staff were not inappropriatelyqflulncine Oppositionlodged three publicservants, to thebenefit of theirfo"".t clienis,the State identitythe clientbase of on Noticeinthe StatePalliament: two questions.so"ghit euestion *a tlt third questionasked for formerlobbyists now working for Ministersand the Premier benefitedfrom beingpaid thepremier to identifywhich Ministenai t ufifruapreviously osuccessfees' and from whom' did claimthat shepersonally was Premierrefused to provideany such client base but The haveacted appropriately to ,,satisfiedthat these staff membrr, ;whom she refused to identify] work"' ,nrri, no conflictof inlerestarise in theirday to day of Infornatlon requestfor all the As a resultof this answer,my Officethen lodged a Fr1\d9m thattrer staff, who hadbeen former paperworkupon which ttre Premier f,ua tuiitiid herself of interest' lobbyists,were acting appropriately with no conflict uponwhich the.Premier based The FOlapplicationrevealed that there was not onedocument evenasked to seea list of theformer herdecision: in otherwords, the Premier has never