1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:01,680 Speaker 1: So let's look at the employment side of the mix 2 00:00:01,680 --> 00:00:04,519 Speaker 1: skimming scandal. The independent report from the Public Services Commission. 3 00:00:04,519 --> 00:00:07,080 Speaker 1: How to look at the reference and probity checks used 4 00:00:07,080 --> 00:00:09,280 Speaker 1: in employing him? Now, So Brian Roches, of course, the 5 00:00:09,280 --> 00:00:11,479 Speaker 1: Public Service Commissioner is with us. Good morning to you, 6 00:00:12,520 --> 00:00:14,560 Speaker 1: good morning. Where would you say, well, how would you 7 00:00:14,560 --> 00:00:16,360 Speaker 1: summarize what we've got to so far? 8 00:00:17,720 --> 00:00:19,880 Speaker 2: I think we're in a really difficult position. We're in 9 00:00:19,920 --> 00:00:23,280 Speaker 2: the position where the public is asking very valid questions 10 00:00:23,440 --> 00:00:26,040 Speaker 2: about how did this happen? I think they're fair. We've 11 00:00:26,079 --> 00:00:28,560 Speaker 2: got to respond and be seen to be really transparent. 12 00:00:29,040 --> 00:00:31,440 Speaker 1: This isn't a criticism, but having had a look at 13 00:00:31,480 --> 00:00:33,839 Speaker 1: the report, it strikes me as one of those reports 14 00:00:33,880 --> 00:00:37,560 Speaker 1: that by and large nothing was wrong with the appointment, 15 00:00:37,600 --> 00:00:39,560 Speaker 1: but they've come up or drummed up a few new 16 00:00:39,600 --> 00:00:41,479 Speaker 1: ideas just so they can say, well, here we go, 17 00:00:41,560 --> 00:00:43,199 Speaker 1: we've come up with us. Is that fair or not? 18 00:00:44,840 --> 00:00:46,519 Speaker 2: I think it's a little unfair. I mean, they did 19 00:00:46,600 --> 00:00:49,440 Speaker 2: raise very valid points where we could improve. We embrace 20 00:00:49,520 --> 00:00:54,520 Speaker 2: those straight away. We've modified our whole practices now, and 21 00:00:54,840 --> 00:00:58,400 Speaker 2: you know, we're really confident that we would have detected 22 00:00:58,440 --> 00:01:00,600 Speaker 2: this had we had to write them for from the 23 00:01:00,720 --> 00:01:04,000 Speaker 2: right people. The IPCA report clearly shows we didn't get 24 00:01:04,040 --> 00:01:06,680 Speaker 2: everything we legitimately expected right. 25 00:01:06,760 --> 00:01:09,480 Speaker 1: But having said that, I mean in each is this 26 00:01:09,520 --> 00:01:12,800 Speaker 1: specific to a certain senior level of public service appointment? 27 00:01:13,200 --> 00:01:16,160 Speaker 1: Because how forensic do you want to go? Where's the line? 28 00:01:17,400 --> 00:01:21,280 Speaker 2: Well, this is very specific for the statutory deputy commissioners, 29 00:01:21,280 --> 00:01:27,200 Speaker 2: but we have also strengthened our privity checks on all employees. 30 00:01:27,280 --> 00:01:30,959 Speaker 2: It's fundamental to public confidence that they can trust the 31 00:01:31,000 --> 00:01:35,319 Speaker 2: people who occupy key positions, and in this situation we 32 00:01:35,360 --> 00:01:37,560 Speaker 2: could have done better. We acknowledge it, and we have 33 00:01:37,680 --> 00:01:39,679 Speaker 2: done much better in the recent appointment. 34 00:01:40,040 --> 00:01:42,080 Speaker 1: Generally though, it was a solid process. 35 00:01:41,800 --> 00:01:43,720 Speaker 2: Wasn't it? 36 00:01:43,200 --> 00:01:43,440 Speaker 1: It was? 37 00:01:44,280 --> 00:01:47,160 Speaker 2: But we're a learning organization. The whole public sector needs 38 00:01:47,200 --> 00:01:49,920 Speaker 2: to continue to learn, modify and innovate. This is a 39 00:01:50,000 --> 00:01:53,000 Speaker 2: very good example. We live in a really strange world 40 00:01:53,080 --> 00:01:56,800 Speaker 2: where we can have people with alternative lives as mister 41 00:01:56,880 --> 00:02:00,760 Speaker 2: mc skimming had. He hid that from everybody, including his family, 42 00:02:00,920 --> 00:02:04,200 Speaker 2: his employer and us. We have to avoid that. Again. 43 00:02:04,320 --> 00:02:06,600 Speaker 1: The problem with Hick Skimming was he was, for reasons 44 00:02:06,680 --> 00:02:11,440 Speaker 1: best known to himself, active on you know, the company's computer. 45 00:02:11,639 --> 00:02:15,280 Speaker 1: If he's not you what do you do with that? 46 00:02:15,480 --> 00:02:17,480 Speaker 1: I mean, you know you've got a weirdo, but he's 47 00:02:17,480 --> 00:02:19,320 Speaker 1: a weirdo at home. Does that make him no good 48 00:02:19,320 --> 00:02:19,800 Speaker 1: at the job? 49 00:02:21,800 --> 00:02:25,240 Speaker 2: It raises questions on character. If people have that sort 50 00:02:25,280 --> 00:02:28,480 Speaker 2: of behavior as part of their normal life, it raises 51 00:02:28,600 --> 00:02:31,040 Speaker 2: questions in my mind, and I think in the questions 52 00:02:31,560 --> 00:02:34,040 Speaker 2: in the minds of many others. We have to avoid 53 00:02:34,080 --> 00:02:36,560 Speaker 2: that to the best of our ability. I'm interested that 54 00:02:36,639 --> 00:02:39,920 Speaker 2: i FBI, for instance, have light detectors. I'm not suggesting that, 55 00:02:40,080 --> 00:02:43,720 Speaker 2: but that is the level of forensic inquiry that's required 56 00:02:43,800 --> 00:02:47,519 Speaker 2: for certain people who hold positions in public office. 57 00:02:47,639 --> 00:02:49,960 Speaker 1: Flip side of that as a recruitment issue, isn't it? 58 00:02:50,040 --> 00:02:51,360 Speaker 1: Potentially it is. 59 00:02:51,760 --> 00:02:53,720 Speaker 2: It is because people are saying, well, you know, where's 60 00:02:53,720 --> 00:02:57,360 Speaker 2: the boundary between my private life? Fully respect that, but 61 00:02:57,480 --> 00:03:00,680 Speaker 2: we need to make people really clear. The obstigation is 62 00:03:00,720 --> 00:03:04,480 Speaker 2: on them to keep us informed when there are issues 63 00:03:04,520 --> 00:03:05,600 Speaker 2: that we need to know about. 64 00:03:05,680 --> 00:03:08,120 Speaker 1: There's sort of three things here, correct me if I'm wrong. 65 00:03:08,360 --> 00:03:12,960 Speaker 1: There's his online activity which has a legal implication, his 66 00:03:13,120 --> 00:03:18,880 Speaker 1: relationship activity, which is not illegal. And I don't know 67 00:03:18,880 --> 00:03:21,240 Speaker 1: what you call it, the cost or aspect of it 68 00:03:21,280 --> 00:03:23,480 Speaker 1: where we're all mates and we look after each other. 69 00:03:23,639 --> 00:03:24,480 Speaker 1: I mean, is that fair? 70 00:03:26,080 --> 00:03:28,440 Speaker 2: It is fair? And I've got to work through all 71 00:03:28,480 --> 00:03:31,440 Speaker 2: of those. It's a matter of public record. I'm in an 72 00:03:31,360 --> 00:03:34,360 Speaker 2: an employment process with Andy Coster at the moment. I 73 00:03:34,400 --> 00:03:37,040 Speaker 2: want to get through that as quickly as I can. 74 00:03:37,160 --> 00:03:40,320 Speaker 2: But I am bound by a legal process and my 75 00:03:40,400 --> 00:03:42,000 Speaker 2: obligations as a good employer. 76 00:03:42,120 --> 00:03:44,040 Speaker 1: So how many questions should I ask you on Coster? 77 00:03:44,200 --> 00:03:46,080 Speaker 1: And you're going to say I can't say anything. 78 00:03:47,400 --> 00:03:50,120 Speaker 2: That probably covers it, and I know that's frustrating, but 79 00:03:50,200 --> 00:03:52,240 Speaker 2: I am not going to create a technical foul. 80 00:03:53,760 --> 00:03:56,839 Speaker 1: Can I ask you as a general concept, because I'm 81 00:03:57,120 --> 00:04:00,920 Speaker 1: this is a genuine question that I'm interested in. If 82 00:04:01,000 --> 00:04:04,120 Speaker 1: you are in a job and you've done nothing wrong 83 00:04:04,160 --> 00:04:07,680 Speaker 1: in your new job, can you exit a person with 84 00:04:07,800 --> 00:04:10,560 Speaker 1: them having done something poorly in a previous job? 85 00:04:12,160 --> 00:04:14,680 Speaker 2: I think the issue is if the information had been 86 00:04:14,720 --> 00:04:17,719 Speaker 2: available to you at the time of the appointment, would 87 00:04:17,720 --> 00:04:20,520 Speaker 2: it have been relevant? And that's at the heart of 88 00:04:20,560 --> 00:04:21,039 Speaker 2: this matter. 89 00:04:21,120 --> 00:04:23,120 Speaker 1: And is that legal? Is that a legal thing that 90 00:04:23,160 --> 00:04:26,440 Speaker 1: you can pin specifically on and say, legally we're in 91 00:04:26,480 --> 00:04:28,280 Speaker 1: the right here or not? We don't know that. Are 92 00:04:28,279 --> 00:04:29,640 Speaker 1: we making this up as we go? Along. 93 00:04:30,880 --> 00:04:32,600 Speaker 2: That's the sort of part of the process that I'm 94 00:04:32,640 --> 00:04:33,640 Speaker 2: unable to comment on. 95 00:04:33,720 --> 00:04:37,920 Speaker 1: I'm sorry, Okay, if he walks with a check, how 96 00:04:37,960 --> 00:04:39,119 Speaker 1: does that play? Do you reckon? 97 00:04:40,760 --> 00:04:43,240 Speaker 2: I think that would be very challenging. That we are 98 00:04:43,279 --> 00:04:45,440 Speaker 2: getting into the detail of the process that I'm still 99 00:04:45,480 --> 00:04:47,960 Speaker 2: locked into, and I know it's frustrating that I really 100 00:04:48,000 --> 00:04:48,919 Speaker 2: just can't comment on that. 101 00:04:49,360 --> 00:04:51,480 Speaker 1: No, I'm just trying to anticipate what's going to happen, 102 00:04:51,520 --> 00:04:55,279 Speaker 1: because I just, I genuinely can't work out why a 103 00:04:55,360 --> 00:04:58,000 Speaker 1: person who hasn't done anything wrong in his new job 104 00:04:58,040 --> 00:05:01,640 Speaker 1: would be exited without a check, given who's employee has 105 00:05:01,680 --> 00:05:02,280 Speaker 1: done nothing wrong. 106 00:05:04,240 --> 00:05:08,159 Speaker 2: That's an opinion which I understand. There is a lot 107 00:05:08,200 --> 00:05:11,479 Speaker 2: of other opinion that suggests otherwise, based on the messaging 108 00:05:11,560 --> 00:05:14,920 Speaker 2: that I'm getting from the public. So I'll just navigate 109 00:05:14,920 --> 00:05:16,840 Speaker 2: my way through that. I'll do it as quickly as 110 00:05:16,880 --> 00:05:20,240 Speaker 2: I can, and it'll it will withstand third party scrutiny. 111 00:05:20,320 --> 00:05:21,279 Speaker 2: That is the test to me. 112 00:05:21,600 --> 00:05:22,919 Speaker 1: What's the timeframe on all this? 113 00:05:23,080 --> 00:05:27,080 Speaker 2: Roughly, I think it needs to be done as soon 114 00:05:27,120 --> 00:05:30,359 Speaker 2: as practicable. It's not in anyone's interest for this to 115 00:05:30,400 --> 00:05:34,720 Speaker 2: be hanging. It's uncertainty. I value certainty, and so I 116 00:05:34,760 --> 00:05:37,800 Speaker 2: will be giving it my absolute highest priority to get 117 00:05:37,839 --> 00:05:40,799 Speaker 2: this done, and then I'm happy to talk further with you. 118 00:05:40,800 --> 00:05:43,719 Speaker 1: You're an experienced operator. Have you got a theory as 119 00:05:43,760 --> 00:05:46,960 Speaker 1: to what it is about cops that we've been here 120 00:05:47,000 --> 00:05:49,400 Speaker 1: before and we may well be here again. What happens? 121 00:05:50,839 --> 00:05:53,039 Speaker 2: Well, I think the actions that have been announced to 122 00:05:53,080 --> 00:05:56,040 Speaker 2: bring in sort of an inspector general type thing are critical. 123 00:05:56,120 --> 00:05:58,680 Speaker 2: This is sort of the second time in my career 124 00:05:58,720 --> 00:06:02,040 Speaker 2: that this has happened. Third, the police are one of 125 00:06:02,120 --> 00:06:05,120 Speaker 2: the most important institutions of the state that they have 126 00:06:05,279 --> 00:06:09,080 Speaker 2: to be above approach. This report highlights that they aren't. 127 00:06:09,360 --> 00:06:11,679 Speaker 2: I think that's to the detriment of all the serving 128 00:06:11,720 --> 00:06:15,480 Speaker 2: officers who every day are giving their best for the country. 129 00:06:15,200 --> 00:06:17,240 Speaker 1: Exactly well, so I appreciate it very much, Sir Brian Rodch, 130 00:06:17,240 --> 00:06:20,839 Speaker 1: who's the roach, who's the Public Service Commissioner? For more 131 00:06:20,920 --> 00:06:24,000 Speaker 1: from the mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to news talks 132 00:06:24,040 --> 00:06:27,240 Speaker 1: that'd be from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast 133 00:06:27,240 --> 00:06:28,080 Speaker 1: on iHeartRadio.