CHAPTER 3 | performance report

Output 2 Provision of advice to government to improve public administration

Output 2 menu:
2.1 Improvements to government administration and recommendations implemented
2.2 Formal recommendations arising from investigations
2.3 Feedback on auditing and monitoring activities
2.4 Audits of telecommunications intercept records
2.5: Inspection of controlled operations records

Output 2.1 Improvements to government administration and recommendations implemented

Performance indicator Assessment of improvement to government administration, including feedback from departments and agencies on the value of advice received from the Ombudsman and the extent to which Ombudsman recommendations have been implemented.

The Ombudsman has discretionary power to decline to investigate a complaint, unless it has first been raised with the agency concerned. This has sometimes been perceived as defining the Ombudsman as 'the office of last resort', but that is not an accurate description. Even where a person contacts the Ombudsman as a first point of complaint, the policy of the office is to provide guidance and some assistance to the person on how and where best to pursue the complaint in the first instance. Sample studies have been undertaken in the past to gauge the effectiveness of this referral activity, and more targeted work of this kind will be conducted in 2004–05. A Client Satisfaction Survey conducted in May 2004 showed that the large majority (87%) of complainants who were advised to take up their complaint directly with the agency followed our advice.

The Ombudsman's office recognises that if a complainant is to be referred back to an agency, it is vital that the agency has an effective internal complaint-handling mechanism in place. Each year the office gives a high priority to monitoring agency complaint handling and to working closely with agencies to assist them to improve their internal complaint-handling procedures. This year we conducted reviews into the complaint-handling mechanisms employed by the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (relating to the Job Network) and the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS). The review of DOTARS' complaint-handling mechanisms will be finalised in 2004–05.

The notion that complaint handling should first be addressed by the agency concerned is also recognised in other formal ways in the legislation establishing the Commonwealth Ombudsman. Examples are complaints about the AFP, which are ordinarily investigated in the first instance by AFP Professional Standards; and complaints in the Defence jurisdiction, which must first be pursued through the formal redress of grievance processes under the Defence Act 1903, other than in exceptional circumstances.

In summary, most of the investigation work of the Ombudsman's office occurs in three areas:

• where there is no alternative avenue of resolution available to a person, because of either their circumstances or those of the particular complaint
  
  
• where there is an indication of a systemic problem in government administration, likely to affect a number of people
  
  
• where a complainant remains dissatisfied with the outcome of their treatment, despite a review having already been undertaken by an agency.

Output 2.2 Formal recommendations arising from investigations

Performance indicator The number of formal recommendations made to departments and agencies aimed at improving administration and service delivery, which arise from reports of own motion and systemic investigations.

During the year, the Ombudsman released reports on four own motion investigations; two of the investigations were completed and provided to the agency in 2002–03, and were reported in last year's annual report. These reports are available at www.ombudsman.gov.au. Several own motion investigations are currently being conducted and are due to be completed in early 2004–05.

Of the two own motion investigations conducted and finalised in 2003–04, all of the 15 recommendations in the investigation reports were accepted by agencies.

The Ombudsman's own motion investigation reports released in 2003–04 comprised:

• July 2003—Australian Taxation Office complaint handling
  
  
• August 2003—Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, complaints handling in the Job Network
  
  
• May 2004—Child Support Agency change of assessment decisions made on the basis of parents' income, earning capacity, property and financial resources
  
  
• June 2004—Australian Crime Commission investigation into a review of the operational and corporate implications for the Australian Crime Commission arising from alleged criminal activity by two former secondees.

The high incidence of departments and agencies accepting Ombudsman recommendations for systemic and administrative improvements suggests a highly satisfactory level of performance in identifying opportunities for improvement in administrative practices and procedures during 2003–04.

Under powers conferred by the Complaints Act, Ombudsman staff worked on four special investigations relating to the AFP. Three of these investigations focused on conduct rather than administrative or service delivery issues. The other related to an investigation of certain aspects of the AFP's administration of the National Witness Protection Program that had come under criticism in a matter before a court. Two of these investigations will be completed in 2004–05.

Output 2.3 Feedback on auditing and monitoring activities

Performance indicator Feedback from relevant Ministers and the Commonwealth Parliament on the relevance and utility of Ombudsman reports on auditing and monitoring activities related to law enforcement.

Throughout the year, the Ombudsman provided reports to the Attorney-General under the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 (the TI Act) and to the Minister for Justice and Customs in relation to inspections undertaken in accordance with the Crimes Act 1914. A report of our activities in inspecting controlled operations was tabled in Parliament. Feedback from the Attorney-General has indicated his satisfaction with the performance of the office.

The AFP and ACC regularly consult and liaise with Ombudsman staff on issues such as training and development, current and emerging issues, and our expectations of their staff concerning the administration of telecommunications interception warrants. This demonstrates the growing maturity of our relationship with these agencies.

Ombudsman staff also met with representatives from the Security Law Branch of the Attorney-General's Department during the year to discuss matters relating to the interpretation of the TI Act and to provide comments on proposed policy changes to the Act.

Output 2.4 Audits of telecommunications intercept records

Performance indicator Completion of at least two audits of telecommunications intercept records each year and provision of a timely and complete report to the Minister.

In 2003–04, a total of four inspections of telecommunications intercept records were conducted. Two inspections were conducted at the AFP and two inspections at the ACC. A report was made to the Attorney-General on the results of those inspections. The reports concluded that the agencies are generally complying with the requirements of the TI Act.

These inspections continue to form a core element of the work of the Ombudsman's Law Enforcement Team. The inspection methodology used and resource levels required are regularly reviewed to ensure that the accountability role of the office continues to be met.

Output 2.5: Inspection of controlled operations records

Performance indicator Quarterly inspection of law enforcement agency controlled operations records and provision of timely and comprehensive report to the Parliament.

During the year, a total of four inspections of controlled operations records were conducted. Two inspections were conducted at the AFP and two inspections at the ACC. These inspections resulted in reports to both agencies and the Minister for Customs and Justice, a briefing to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the ACC, and the presentation of a report to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate in January 2004. The reports concluded that the agencies are generally complying with the requirements of the Crimes Act and generally providing comprehensive and accurate information in formal reports.

Following the Ombudsman's briefing to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the ACC in October 2003, an own motion investigation was commenced under the Ombudsman Act 1976 into controlled operations carried out by the ACC under State and/or Territory legislation. The investigation is due to be completed in 2004–05.