Ombudsman SA Annual Report 2009/2010 The Honourable President LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Parliament House Adelaide The Honourable Speaker HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Parliament House Adelaide It is my duty and privilege to submit the South Australian Ombudsman’s 38th Annual Report for 2009-10 to the Parliament, as required by section 29(1) of the Ombudsman Act 1972. Richard Bingham OMBUDSMAN Level 5 East Wing Telephone 08 8226 8699 [email protected] 50 Grenfell Street Facsimile 08 8226 8602 www.ombudsman.sa.gov.au Adelaide SA 5000 Toll free 1800 182 150 1 Contents The Year in Review 3 Government Departments 7 Local Government 17 Other Authorities 30 Freedom of Information 40 About Ombudsman SA 55 Appendices 1. Financial Statement 57 2. Description of Outcomes - 58 Ombudsman Jurisdiction 3. Description of Outcomes - 60 FOI Jurisdiction 4. Speeches & Staff Development 61 2 The Year In Review !PI[JMMVIJ][a IVLZM_IZLQVOaMIZNWZ 7UJ]L[UIV;) Highlights Review of Integrity Structures Based on recent years’ experience, Workload On 5 May 2010, the Attorney General, this change will result in approximately 50 fewer complaints 2009-10 has been a busy and Hon John Rau MP, made a Ministerial per annum to Ombudsman SA. rewarding year for Ombudsman SA. Statement to Parliament in which In particular: he foreshadowed a review of the organisations which comprise South Ombudsman Investigations · We received 8 834 approaches Australia’s public integrity system. My Section 22 confidentiality provision from members of the public. 5 635 office is one of those organisations, I observed in my Annual Report last (approximately 64 per cent) were and I made a submission to the year that the confidentiality provision dealt with by the provision of advice review. in section 22(1) of the Ombudsman or referral to a more appropriate Act prevents me from informing the body. I welcome the opportunity to reassess Parliament or relevant authorities the linkages and relationships · From those approaches we about a complaint, unless and until a between the public integrity bodies considered 3 199 matters in total - report is published. in this State, and to consider some 2 982 Ombudsman complaints and legislative and other initiatives which 217 FOI matters. This compares Over the past year this has proven would assist effective integrity to the 2 543 matters considered to be a real impediment to my work, oversight. I await the results of the in 2008-09, made up of 2 322 as it prevents me from providing review with interest. Ombudsman complaints and 221 information to others who have a FOI matters. legitimate and reasonable interest in Complaints about health an investigation. registration bodies Overall this represents a 25 per cent increase in matter numbers over the At the end of 2009-10, Ombudsman In my view it would be appropriate to previous year. Complaints about SA lost jurisdiction over a number modify the confidentiality provision Government departments increased of medical professional registration to provide a general discretion to by 37 per cent, those about local bodies which ceased to exist when the Ombudsman to inform others in government by 10 per cent, and those the Australian Health Professional the public interest about a complaint about other authorities by 65 per cent. Regulation Authority (AHPRA) came which does not proceed to a formal into existence under the national report. I am hopeful that this issue · In December 2009, we received registration scheme agreed by the can be addressed through the a reference from the Legislative Council of Australian Governments. Attorney General’s review of public Council to undertake a major integrity structures. investigation into issues affecting the Under the scheme, complaints which City of Charles Sturt. are not resolved by AHPRA may City of Charles Sturt - be made to the National Health Parliamentary referral These workload demands have been Practitioner Ombudsman. The NHP A substantial part of my office’s met from within our existing budget Ombudsman was created as an investigative workload over the past allocation of $1.8 million, as described independent entity, working under year has involved the Legislative in Appendix 1. As a result the office the Commonwealth Ombudsman Council reference regarding the City has been working under some Act 1976, as amended by the Health of Charles Sturt. My office made pressure, and I record my thanks to Practitioner Regulation National Law good progress with the investigation, staff of the office for their efforts. Regulation 2010 for the purposes of with the vast majority of necessary the scheme. 3 8]JTQKI\QWVWN .71 LM\MZUQVI\QWV[Q[VW_I ZMO]TIZXIZ\WN W]Z_WZS information having been collected could investigate under its Ministerial That case was one of the rare and most witnesses having been Direction. instances where an agency ultimately interviewed. has been able to present clear and However, the fact that my office might persuasive reasons for justifying However, on 16 June 2010 I agreed believe that a complaint would not refusal of access to information to suspend the investigation, pending amount to criminal conduct does not under the public interest test in the the resolution of Supreme Court affect our obligation to refer it to the internal working document exemption. action by the City of Charles Sturt. ACB. The arguments were appropriately The action challenged my jurisdiction targeted to specific information in to conduct the investigation on a Freedom of Information the document, and they were not number of bases, and alleged that I I noted in my Annual Report last generalised and speculative. had exceeded my jurisdiction by not year that I intended to publish permitting elected members of the appropriate FOI determinations on Report against the 2009-10 council to be legally represented at the Ombudsman office website. Business Plan their interviews. Publication of FOI determinations on In 2009-10, the Ombudsman SA our website is now a regular part of Business Plan identified three priority At the time of writing the matter our work, and I have abbreviated the initiatives. In accordance with these remains before the Court, with case summaries in this Annual Report initiatives: mediation intended to be conducted. accordingly. The investigation will be the subject · We successfully completed the of a separate report to the Legislative Another significant initiative has implementation of a new case Council in due course. been the regular presentation by management system, in partnership Ombudsman SA staff of one module with Justice Business Services Public interest disclosures in the accredited training program for and other small agencies in the As a potential recipient of public FOI officers, which is co-ordinated by Attorney General’s Department. interest disclosures under the the State Records Office. To complement this system, we Whistleblowers Protection Act 1993, completely reviewed our office I have an obligation to refer them to In relation to FOI determinations, procedures, and commenced a the Anti-Corruption Branch of SA again this year some agencies project to fully document all our Police if they may involve fraud or have sought to rely on generalised policies. corruption. 1 speculation about the adverse consequences of disclosure of a · We arranged a one week specialist Over the past year Ombudsman SA document, in seeking to refuse an training course for all staff in has tended to refer more complaints FOI application. In my view this is investigative practices, and we to the ACB than in the past. It is not not sufficient, and agencies need continued regular training in areas uncommon for the ACB to respond - to provide specific reasoning for such as administrative law and quite properly - that whilst a disclosure their determinations, based on the statutory interpretation. may meet the definition under the Act circumstances and contents of the of ‘public interest information’ that actual documents. · We commenced planning for relates to fraud or corruption, it could enhanced accessibility and outreach not amount to criminal conduct and However, I draw particular attention services. I am keen to ensure that thus is not something that the ACB to an external review involving the this occurs in collaboration with other Environment Protection Authority. integrity and complaints agencies, 1 See section 5(5) of the Whistleblowers Protection Act 1993 4 particularly those associated with Statistical information 2010-11 Business Plan the Attorney General’s Department, The new case management system, Ombudsman SA’s Business Plan since I believe this is more relevant and revised office procedures for 2010-11 identifies three priority for the community, and more cost incorporating target timeframes for initiatives: effective. completion of files, commenced operation on 15 March 2010. · To respond appropriately to the Other significant achievements in Information from the new system outcomes of the Attorney General’s 2009-10 included: will provide a more complete picture review of public integrity structures of our work, and future reports will · We conducted six regional seminars provide further detail on matters · To commence a program of systemic for local government on their such as timeframes within which audits responsibilities under the FOI Act investigations are completed. · To complete documentation of all · We introduced an internship program However, as this report covers a office policies and business rules. for law students from the University transitional period, some readers may of Adelaide and Uni SA. This has have difficulty identifying information I intend to report on progress in these proven to be very beneficial for both which they seek because some priorities in the Annual Report next the office and the students involved. elements of the statistical reporting year. framework has changed. This · We introduced new branding and an concerns particularly the classification enhanced website for Ombudsman of matters as Ombudsman complaints, SA the identification of issues within complaints, and the introduction of Over the past year we continued to new outcome categories.