AirServices CEO queried over knowledge of Crimes Act
Ben Sandilands | Oct 23, 2014 3:46PM | EMAIL |
PRINT
Early this week during Senate Estimates hearings the CEO of AirServices Australia, Margaret Staib, was questioned as to why she didn’t refer a manager who stole up to $20,000 from the Commonwealth to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
This is what is reported in Hansard, but was apparently too hot for the general media to handle.
Senator STERLE: Ms Staib, you indicated that an employee was dismissed for credit-card misuse in the last few months. Could you tell us the employee’s level and how much was involved?
Ms Staib : There was an employee dismissed in the last couple of months for credit-card abuse. The level of that person was middle management, but I do not have the figure at hand for the amount involved.
Senator STERLE: It is a pretty serious issue, because they were dismissed. Does anyone else have the amount? Gentlemen, you have that blank look on your faces—it is not so hard. How many people get dismissed the credit-card misuse? Someone must have the figure. I do not believe that you do not have it.
CHAIR: While you are thinking about that, given that the Crimes Act has a misprision felony, has it been reported to the police?
Ms Staib : This incident had not been reported to the police.
CHAIR: Then whoever who knew about it but did not report it is a criminal under the Crimes Act. Do you understand the Crimes Act and a misprision felony? I am putting you on notice.
Ms Staib : I am sorry but I do not have the figure at hand. I simply cannot recall it.
Senator STERLE: Chair, through you, the next time they come to estimates, can they do their homework?
Ms Staib : It is in the order of about 10,000 to 20,000 dollars and it was around travel, if my memory serves me correctly.
Senator STERLE: Ms Staib, for future estimates, if you can just come out with it, rather than saying, ‘We don’t have a clue.’ It would make life a lot easier.
Senator WILLIAMS: Will you be doing a referral to the DPP on this issue? Surely, embezzlement—or whatever you want to call it—of 10 to 20 thousand dollars should face criminal charges.
Ms Staib : This matter will not be referred, but on another matter—
Senator WILLIAMS: Why?
Ms Staib : as soon as we discovered that issue, we referred it directly to the Australian Federal Police. In fact, that matter is before the courts as we speak.
Senator WILLIAMS: This person was sacked for putting items on a credit card that they were not allowed and it involved $10,000 to $20,000, but it does not get referred to the DPP. Why not?
Ms Staib : We have not done that, Senator.
Senator WILLIAMS: You say the matter will not be referred to the DPP. I am asking you: why not? I strike this all the time with ASIC and financial planners who forge things. They do such white collar crime and walk away scot-free. It is totally unacceptable. Will you refer this to the DPP, please?
Ms Staib : I will have a look at that.
CHAIR: Can I carefully remind you of the Crimes Act and obligation. Not if you are sure but if you have ‘reasonable knowledge’ of an act like fraud, you yourself become a felon under the Crimes Act if you do not report it.
The chair was Senator Bill Heffernan, coalition, NSW, Glenn Sterle is a Labor Senator from, Western Australia and John Williams is a coalition Senator from NSW.
If that Hansard transcript reads as incredible, given the pursuit of disgraced Labor figure Craig Thomson, who spend $28,449 on prostitutes, porn, and upper end ice creams taken from union funds, or ex House of Reps Speaker, Peter Slipper, who was found guilty of misusing $1194 worth of Commonwealth Cabcharge dockets, then enjoy the following two You Tubes.
They capture the entire live videocast of the hearings last Monday, capturing Ms Staibs performance as well as other matters, starting with
this video, and finishing with
the sequel here.
There are some reasonable points of fairness and competency in public administration that arise from that Estimates hearing.
Was Ms Staib ignorant of her obligations under the Crimes Act, or did she knowingly choose to ignore them? The hearing didn’t clear up that question.
Should public servants in general feel they are exempt from the application of the criminal law of Australia, without specifically engaging the question as to what Ms Staib thinks or does, since this is an issue about how our public service should be run, not what the head of AirServices might believe to be the case or the correct course of action?
Ms Staib has a difficult job to do, and deserves respect for trying to do it to the best of her ability. But whether her attitudes to or knowledge of the law, and the Crimes Act in particular, are up to the required standard is another matter.
The worst thing that can happen to Government is to become distrusted or despised by ordinary people, and to a large extent, how well or poorly a Government may come to be perceived, such perceptions will be significantly formed by the culture and competency of its public administration.
In might be said, in the most general of contexts, that a public service culture that thinks it is immune from rthe criminal law of Australia is a culture than can destroy respect for Government. Whoever allegedly stole up to $20,000 from the vital government owned and controlled entity that is AirServices Australia needs to be identified and prosecuted, and if necessary punished in addition to having the value of any such proceeds of crime recovered from their assets.