Skip to Content
Menu Close

Introduction

Investigation summaries are presented individually in this section to improve accessibility, transparency, and convenience for the community.

Investigation Dazzler

Description

Investigation Dazzler considered the alleged failure of senior employees to follow company policies and the code of conduct in 3 recruitment processes, and to keep adequate records of their recruitment decisions. It included allegations that conflicts of interest that arose during the recruitment were not properly declared and managed.

Sector: State-owned company
Respondent level: Designated Public Officer, Public Officer
Misconduct risk(s): Improper exercise of powers in recruitment and failure to adopt a merit-based approach
Outcome: Referred to Principal Officer for action

Related resources:

Investigation Eagle

Description

Investigation Eagle considered multiple allegations that councillors and senior staff of a local council engaged in: fraud, bullying and unsafe work practices; poor procurement practices; improper use of power and information for personal profit; and improper management of conflicts of interest, and nepotism/cronyism in the awarding of works contracts.

Sector: Local Government
Respondent level: Designated Public Officer, Elected Representative, Public Officer
Misconduct risk(s): Failure to comply with code of conduct, including fraud, bullying and unsafe work practices
Outcome: Dismissed

Related resources:

Investigation Fisher

Description

Own-motion investigation Fisher considered possible misconduct committed by a former councillor with Derwent Valley Council (Council), or other council officers, in relation to their contact with a property developer. This arose from information received from the Office of Local Government about the Councillor's conduct. The Board extended the scope of investigation to consider the Councillor allegedly sharing confidential Council information with a local journalist.

Sector: Local Government
Respondent level: Designated Public Officer
Misconduct risk(s): Improper use of information and conflicts of interest arising from association with member of public
Outcome: Referred to the Principal Officer for action

Related resources:

Investigation Smithies

Description

Investigation Smithies considered 8 recruitment processes conducted by senior managers at a local council. Our assessment of the original complaint identified no evidence of personal relationships creating conflicts of interest; however the minimal documentation in each of the selection processes suggested a lack of policy and process, and a possible failure to apply the merit principle.

The investigation confirmed that the managers did not have personal conflicts of interest arising in the recruitments. However, professional associations were not declared or managed and were allowed to affect recruitment outcomes. Further, the council did not have a recruitment procedure, and its record keeping procedures were poor, with no selection reports or other records showing how candidates were selected on merit. Some recruitments involved direct appointments, again with little documentation created by the council.

The systemic misconduct risks identified in the investigation were considered in a separate research report. It found that, unlike other Australian jurisdictions, local councils are not required to recruit on merit. The Board has recommended that the Minister for Local Government reinstate in the Local Government Act 1993 the requirement for employees to be recruited on merit; and develop a model recruitment policy for Tasmanian councils.

Sector: Local Government
Respondent level: Designated Public Officer, Public Officer
Misconduct risk(s): Failure to manage conflicts of interest and improper exercise of powers in recruitment
Outcome: Referred to the Principal Officer for action

Related resources:

This page was last updated on 23 Nov 2023.