Submission No. Received /} /oG /Q0l b IBAC Committee . Hon Lisa Neville MP Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Water 8 Nicholson Street East Melbourne, Victoria 3002 Telephone: 03 9637 9654 DX210098 The Hon Kim Wells MP Ref, MIN015103 IIMIIIIIIIUIIIIR!Iilll!!llllmll Chair Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission Committee Parliament of Victoria Parliament House Spring Street EAST MELBOURNE VIC 3002 \ ' DearM~s~ SUBMISSION TO PARLIAMENTARY IBAC COMMITTEE ON THE PROTECTED DISCLOSURE ACT 2012 (VIC) Thank you for your letters of 4 April 2016 to the Minister for Planning, the Hon Richard Wynne, and myself on behalf of the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission Committee. I am responding on behalf of the Minister for Planning and myself. The Committee has sought information about the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning's experiences of the Protected Disclosure Act 2012 (the Act). The Minister for Planning and I have referred the questions asked by the· Committee to the department. The department has confirmed that it has received no assessable disclosures pursuant to the Act to date. As such, the department's attached response is confined to its experiences operating under the Act. If you would like more infnrm,>tir>n Director Legislation and Statutory Services Thank you again for your letter. Yours sincerely Minister for Water \\jl:.. ;!<a Encl. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP): response to IBAC Committee questionnaire. What works well in the current Protected Disclosure Act 2012 (Vic)? The Act requires the institutionalisation of a robust integrity system within the department which is implemented through training, awareness and ethical leadership. This has had positive implications for work in the risk, fraud and corruption area as it elevates awareness, notably the potential for fraud and corruption and how to prevent, identify and address it, and encourages staff to be more receptive to training. The provision of guidelines by the Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission (IBAC) is extremely useful in the implementation of processes in accordance with the Act. As the Act itself is quite complex and difficult to interpret in parts, the IBAC guidelines provide helpful clarity. The reduced timelines for receiving, assessing and referring a disclosure compared to the Whistleblowers Protection Act 2001, enables a more responsive approach which should result in faster action in response to, and prevention of, serious misconduct. A clear benefit from having stringent requirements, is to instill confidence in disclosers that they will be protected from reprisals and encourage more people to come forward and report misconduct. The department is supportive of the regime as it allows individuals to go directly to an external body such as IBAC. Ensuring investigations are undertaken by independent third parties with investigation expertise will negate any perception of possible conflicts of interest by investigators. What are some of the challenges with the Protected Disclosure Act 2012 (Vic)? The department has set up systems for record keeping and communication which are compliant with the guidelines issued by IBAC in accordance with the Act. From an operational perspective, the major challenge posed by the Act is in establishing stringent processes for receiving and handling disclosures which are entirely secure and ensuring that the identity of the discloser is not revealed when making internal enquiries. It is challenging to promote accessibility to disclosures through the use of existing IT systems and ensure that confidentiality is sufficiently protected. There are a large number of department officers who can receive disclosures (any supervisor or manager as well as the Protected Disclosure Coordinator and department Secretary). As a result there is a reliance on officers' abilities to comprehend and comply with this complex Act. Even with the assistance of training and guidance material, there is a risk of inadvertent breach of the confidentiality and secrecy provisions. This in turn exposes individuals to significant penalties prescribed by the Act. It is a challenge for the department to ensure all department officers have access to training and support materials, and ensure that they understand the requirements­ although they may never have to deal with a protected disclosure. If a disclosure is made direct to IBAC that has health and safety implications, the department is not in a position to effectively and efficiently address potential risks to the health and safety of its staff or the public. Although the Act does not prevent the department from taking its own management actions (as long as it is clear that it is not detrimental action), without knowledge of the alleged misconduct, the department cannot take management action. MIN015103 .