Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the report of the Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee on the Department of Parliamentary Services, together with the Hansard record of proceedings and documents presented to the committee.

Ordered that the report be printed.

I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

This is the committee's third and final report of this very important inquiry. It was established over 12 months ago and in that time the committee has covered a broad range of issues in relation to the management and performance of the Department of Parliamentary Services.

The committee's first interim report covered three specific matters:

•   the Australian National Audit Office's audit of the management of assets and contracts at Parliament House;

•   the process leading to the awarding of the photograph commission to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Parliament House; and

•   the background and conclusions of the Senate Committee of Privileges inquiry into the use of CCTV material in Parliament House, in particular, inconsistent evidence provided to the committee by the former Secretary of DPS, Ms Carol Mills.

The committee's second report dealt only with the misleading evidence provided by Ms Mills.

In this third report the committee has covered a range of issues pursuant to the terms of reference, including the response to the committee's recommendations in its 2012 report, particularly in relation to heritage management; building and asset management; contract management; and workplace culture.

Before going into the committee's conclusions and recommendations, I note that the Presiding Officers, through the Parliamentary Service Commissioner, have commenced a recruitment process to fill the position of Secretary of DPS. I also note that there is currently an independent structural review of DPS underway.

The committee agrees with the need to look at the structure of DPS and makes the following comments resulting from the inquiry.

The committee understands that there have been significant changes in DPS senior management structure since 2012 and the committee accepts that there was a need for restructure. However, the committee does not believe that the changes in senior management to date, which include seven new SES positions, have necessarily brought a commensurate improvement in management within DPS.

Given impending consultations on the position of secretary and the structural review of DPS, the committee has not made any further comment on the senior management structure of DPS, but has included a recommendation that the committee is to be kept updated of changes within DPS senior management prior to each estimates hearing.

On the remainder of the matters covered in this inquiry, the evidence that the committee has received during the course of this inquiry causes it great concern. Like the ANAO, the committee finds it hard to identify anything positive coming from the many recommendations made in the committee's 2012 interim and final reports.

In relation to heritage management, the committee heard that all the significant documents for the heritage management of this building are incomplete. The central reference document, which this committee recommended be completed three years ago, has not progressed at all. The conservation management plan and the design principles, the development of which the former secretary announced three years ago, are still not complete.

The committee has recommended that DPS dedicate the necessary resources to have the conservation management plan and the design principles completed by 30 October 2015 and the central reference document complete by 30 September 2017. Further, the committee is also seeking an update from DPS prior to every estimates hearing on the progress with these documents.

The committee notes that not all recommendations in relation to building management from the 2012 report have been addressed, and the committee acknowledges that DPS's financial position has constrained its ability to respond to those recommendations. One particular issue the committee considered in relation to building management is the tracking of assets throughout the building. This matter arose out of findings in the ANAO report about the disposal of assets from Parliament House. In light of these findings, the committee has made a recommendation that DPS undertake a stocktake of all assets in all areas of Parliament House once every three years.

The committee's consideration of DPS contract management has focused primarily on the photographic commission for the 25th anniversary of Parliament House. The committee can find no redeeming aspect in relation to the process for selecting an artist for this commission. The photographic commission to the value of $40,000 was awarded to someone personally known to the former departmental secretary. Further, there is no documentation to explain the awarding of that photographic commission. The committee notes DPS's invitation to the ANAO to undertake a follow-up audit of contract management, and the committee supports such an audit. The committee has also recommended that DPS undertake an internal audit of contracts put in place in 2015 and provide a copy of the audit report to the committee by 1 February 2016.

DPS's response to recommendations on workplace culture and employment issues was a further area that the committee considered in the course of its inquiry. The committee acknowledges that there has been a reduction in bullying and harassment complaints between 2012-13 and 2013-14.

However, changing a culture of bullying and harassment is an ongoing process to ensure that cultural change becomes embedded within the organisation. The committee has therefore made a number of recommendations for DPS to provide the committee with information about bullying and harassment complaints across the department.

The committee was particularly interested in the factors underlying the low morale within the Hansard section. It seems evident to the committee that a high staff turnover, resulting in a significant increase in the number of trainees, along with high workloads and pressure on resources would potentially lead to a general sense of unhappiness. The committee has recommended that DPS provide the committee with information on the number of Hansard staff and workload prior to each estimates hearing, so that the committee may continue to monitor this issue.

The committee was also alerted to concerns relating to the employment conditions of Visitor Services Officers, and the committee has sought further information from DPS about the trial of full-day shifts for these officers so that the committee can continue to follow this matter through the estimates process.

In addition to considering DPS's progress in responding to the committee's 2012 recommendation the committee considered a range of other matters, including:

And the committee has made recommendations in relation to each of these matters.

In conclusion, the committee believes that DPS is now entering a new stage, which will be marked by the appointment of a new secretary and the outcomes of the independent structural review which the Presiding Officers have initiated.

In the committee's view it is important that a new secretary be allowed to commence at DPS armed with the knowledge of the current status of the department as outlined by both the ANAO and this committee but unencumbered by the overt scrutiny that comes with an ongoing Senate committee inquiry.

However, as the recommendations in this report show, the committee will continue to closely monitor DPS through the estimates process.

Finally, I extend my thanks to my deputy chair, Senator Gallagher, and to Senator Ludwig, as well as to the all those who participated in this committee inquiry. It was undertaken in a very positive sense, in that we wanted to deliver outcomes on behalf of the parliament, to ensure the integrity of Parliament House and the ongoing services to members and senators, as well as to look after those who work in this building, from the security officers right through to those who work in the Hansard section and in every other aspect of the building. It was a very positive project, and I hope that that is reflected in positive outcomes. I also express my thanks to the secretariat, who worked extraordinarily hard in supporting us and putting this report together.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will add a few comments to those the committee chair, Senator Bernardi, has just made. This building and the work that takes place in it form the heart of our nation's democracy. It is a building of great symbolic and architectural significance. It is the home of the nation's government and a place where, at times, great dramas are played out, as we have only recently been reminded. It is a place which pulses with visitors and lobbyists. It is the destination of schoolchildren and families from all around the country, newly arrived migrants, overseas tourists and retirees. It is the place where bills are legislated and debated, where Hansard workers faithfully keep the record of our speeches and debates and where librarians provide high-level research and support to every representative. It is where the security guards and AFP officers are vigilant in ensuring that everyone in the building, from the Prime Minister to every child visitor, is kept safe. It is where committee secretariat staff provide support to politicians inquiring into the issues of the day.

This place is important not only for those who have the privilege to work here but for our national pride, our sense of self and our sense of nationhood. In no small measure, it is a place of employment for many of my constituents, a source of local pride and, at times, when the word 'Canberra' can be a synonym for politics, the source of negative national banter.

It is therefore imperative that, at all levels, Parliament House functions as an effective and efficient, well-oiled machine at all levels; that we can be certain that its heritage is protected, it is well maintained and its assets are accounted for; that its support services are functional and well coordinated; and that its staff are appropriately skilled and led.

The focus of the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee's inquiry has been the performance of the Department of Parliamentary Services, including what progress has been made since the committee's 2012 report. A range of other associated matters were also examined, including the structure of DPS, oversight and security arrangements, the future of ICT services, the use of Parliament House as a commercial venue, the current budget-setting process and the operations and maintenance of the parliamentary estate. There have been two interim reports issued by the committee. This is the third and final report of the committee.

By any measure, this has been a thorough and forensic examination of all aspects of the performance of DPS, and DPS has been found wanting. There is no doubt that the evidence brought before this inquiry, one which commenced before I came into this place, has revealed matters of great concern. I do not intend to canvass issues already dealt with in the interim report or indeed by the chair in his comments. What I would like to focus on is the accountability framework established by the committee to oversight and monitor progress within DPS in remedying and rectifying problematic, organisational, operational and cultural issues that have come to the committee's attention.

First and foremost is the need for regular oversight and monitoring of the administration and management of DPS, including its management structure, details of any bullying and harassment complaints, staffing levels in Hansard and an evaluation of the full-day shift trial in Visitor Services. Dates have been set for required regular updates to be given to the committee prior to estimates hearings. Time lines have also been set for the production of the final conservation management plan and the design principles by 30 October 2015 and the central reference document by 30 September 2017.

There are recommendations for further audits of contract management to be undertaken both internally and by ANAO and the committee has recommended that there be a triennial stocktake of assets in all areas of Parliament House. Importantly in my view, the committee has once again recommended that the funding and administration of DPS be jointly overseen by the Senate Appropriations, Staffing and Security Committee and the House Appropriations and Administration Committee and that standing orders be amended accordingly.

The committee also took the view that, given that a total of $270,000 has already been spent on a review of the visitor experience at Parliament House, DPS now provide the committee with a list of the recommendations that it intends to implement. We know from evidence given to the committee that visitor numbers were falling, that Parliament House in itself is a major tourist attraction but efforts to improve the visitor experience lies stranded without any coherent or centralised management and accountability focus. Similarly, the committee has recommended that DPS provide the committee with a revised and updated policy on the use of Parliament House facilities for functions and events once that policy has been finalised.

Finally, I would like to put on the record my support for the initiation of an independent structural review of DPS and note that that work is currently underway to recruit a new secretary. I remain hopeful that the report tabled here today, combined with the structural review and the appointment of a new secretary, together with the ongoing monitoring of progress of various recommendations, will set a new and purposeful direction for DPS into the future. I would also like to acknowledge and put on the record my thanks to the Chair, Senator Bernardi, and my fellow committee members for the collegiate and cooperative approach taken in finalising this report. It would be remiss of me if I did not put on the record my thanks to former Senators John Faulkner and Kate Lundy, who provided invaluable support and advice to me when I joined the committee in March this year.

Question agreed to.