Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, , 35:59 to 49:06
The committee reviews the significant increase in the department's external legal fees and allegations regarding ministerial conduct. Officials provide a breakdown of legal staffing and address reports of tense discussions between the Minister and staff.
Topics: Government legal services, Workplace culture
Speakers: Hon Sarah Henderson, Jim Betts, Christie McClure, Nita Green, Unknown Speaker, Varun Ghosh
>> Okay. I just want to just trying to race through as many issues as I can. I just want to move to the issue of the amount spent on external legal fees. So just to ensure I fully understand the situation, how many legal staff do you have within the department secretary? And just could you provide me with a breakdown of staff in the APS or SCES level?
>> Uh yes, we can provide that. Um I don't know whether our general counsel as well. Yes, she is. >> Uh and to the extent that we don't have information readily to hand given time is tight. We're happy to obviously take your questions on notice, Senator, to give you the detailed breakdown, but we'll give you as much information as we
>> sorry. Sorry. Apologies secretary just being a bit
>> sorry I know you're on a tight time table so we'll give we'll give you as much information as we can now we'll take anything else that you've asked on notice but we'll give you as much as we can right now.
>> Yeah I look okay if you could I I'll race through these questions. So looking at um SQ25242. response to a question on notice. You provided a financial year breakdown of external legal fees. Do you have a copy of that question on notice to hand? I
don't but my colleagues may
>> so I'll just keep going. Um the amount has more than doubled since 2223 and so it was around the $5 million a year mark.
>> So if this is for the whole department that is likely to be largely um explicable by reference to the Rex voluntary administration where we were quite reliant on external legal advice.
>> Sorry secretary I just couldn't quite hear you. Say that again.
>> Sure. If if um that figure relates to whole of department external legal expenditure, it's likely to be dominated by our reliance on external legal advice for the purposes of the Rex voluntary administration in the aviation sector.
>> Right. And so it's now gone to more than $12 million spent on external legal advice. So you think that it's primarily
>> primarily that? Yes.
>> Because of Rex?
>> Because of Rex. Yes.
>> Can you just give us a breakdown about the how that expenditure was in >> Sure. because it is obviously a a substantial increase. Can you provide some advice on staffing numbers for the internal legal teams within the department?
>> We can provide that now I believe.
>> Um Christine Mccclure, first assistant secretary for legal integrity division. >> Um we don't I don't have the breakdown of the exact staffing numbers and their levels for our internal legal team, but we can absolutely get that for you. Um in relation to
>> can you break down between lawyers and non-legal or non- lawyer staff as well? >> So you like lawyers and what >> support well between lawyers >> and um support staff or parallegals if you could just give us that breakdown as
>> Yep we can take that on notice.
Um just in terms of the external legal spend um just to add to the evidence the secretary has given there was a number of reasons or drivers for increases to that spend. Um there were several large uh matters that the department was dealing with including the Rex matter and other matters that did require intensive legal support including various litigation matters. Um there were a number of other reasons as well. There was um an increase in the number of lawyers in the department and we'll come back to you with those numbers. Um there was also increases in the hourly rates charged by our law firms which all flows through. Um and there was a small uh change resulting from the machinery machining sorry machinery of government changes um where the expenditure for the whole year for the um sport sport portfolio was reported by our department and that was only partially offset by not reporting legal expenditure for the city's portfolio which was transferred out.
>> Could I ask what those other major matters are that those other major
all in front of me from the top of my mind. I do recall we were in the high court um for a matter in relation um there were the the usual range of um litigation matters as well.
>> So in the high court which matter took
>> I don't have the the name of the matter in front of me but I can get that for you.
>> Do you was this the social media age? Uh,
>> no. I'm No, that was a completed matter I'm referring to.
>> All right. If you could bring that back. Can I ask about the social media age ban challenge in the high court later this so when I asked about this last time, your response was that these costs were being shared. Can I just understand what's being incurred on that matter to date and are those costs how those costs are being shared with the attorney
>> Um I don't have the details of the costs for that uh matter with me.
>> If you could bring them back to the table at some point.
>> Yes, we can take as soon as possible
that would be good. >> So do you know what amount has been spent on date?
no. I'm I'm not sure that it would be appropriate to give the amount that has been spent on active litigation because that may well be the subject of um cost discussions or cost orders in in the future.
>> So, we'll take it on notice, Senator. We'll try to provide you what we can. Um, but for the reasons Miss McClure has outlined, there may be some constraints on our ability to disclose expenditure in relation to matters which are still before the courts.
>> I I I do understand that. so how how are those costs being shared between your department and the attorney general's department? >> There was it looked like it was sort of a group effort before. Is there a lead? Is there a lead litigant in terms of which department is leading the litigation?
>> The department is the lead.
>> Sorry.
>> The department is leading
>> your department. >> And can you give us an update on that litigation? Where where is that at? Uh
yes, we can provide the publicly available information on where the case is at. I don't have that um with me at the moment. Or you can bring that back.
>> You can bring that back perhaps uh in the next in the next outcome. >> Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Chair,
>> can I just Senator Henderson, I undertook to um for completeness just to confer with the minister's office about um you made an allegation about a screaming match. I just want to make it very clear on the record there absolutely was no screaming match. The minister respects the public service. Um any decisions as the secretary has put to you about Mr. Chisum's employment was a matter for the department.
>> Was there a tur discussion, Minister?
>> No, I've ruled all of that out. Senator, I' I'm being very clear. The minister had no issues. There was no screaming match. I don't I I've been very clear about that. And the the matter of Mr. Chisum's employment is for the secretary.
>> All right. So, was there a tur discussion or any discussion between the minister and Mr. Chisum?
>> No, Senator, we've we've addressed those questions about
>> No, no, that No, we haven't because we
have been very No, I um I undertook to come back to you so that we didn't need to take it on notice because you wanted an answer this morning and I've done that for you now.
>> Okay. So, what I'm asking is was there a discussion between the minister and Mr. Chisum?
>> The minister Minister and Mr. Chisum had many discussions over a period for many months. I wouldn't characterize them as tur or the other characterizations that
>> And was did the minister have any discussion with Mr. Chisum about his performance following that particular Senate inquiry hearing?
Um I think the secretary explained that there are always discussions about um uh I'm not sure whether it was an internal conversation about the estimates hearing but what I've said to you is the minister respects the public service.
>> Yes, I understand that. If you could on notice establish u minister whether there was a discussion with Mr. Chisum in relation to this particular hearing or his performance at that particular
There's there's no discussion about his performance at that hearing but there are discussions all the time like we meet with the minister on a regular basis and we have discussions about matters which were discussed in Senate
>> Did the minister secretary did the minister ever raise any concerns in relation to that hearing and Mr. Chisum's conduct or performance in that hearing?
>> Not with me. The minister was mainly focused on ensuring that um the department and other agencies took appropriate responses to the triple0ero outage and the deaths that occurred. That was her overwhelming focus.
>> So So it's your evidence that at no point did the minister ever raise any concerns in relation to Mr. Chisum's performance?
>> We discuss all the time how the department is traveling in terms of the delivery of the government's agenda, but beyond that, that's right. Was there a
meeting in her office immediately following that hearing?
>> Uh, I'd have to check that. Well, you meet on a regular basis with the minister, so it's quite possible.
>> Uh, if you could, uh, it's my understanding there was, and it's my understanding, and I'm asking you to be very careful with your evidence here, um, secretary. It's my understanding that the minister did very clearly raise concerns about Mr. Chisum's performance in that Senate inquiry hearing.
>> That's certainly not my recollection. I would uh obviously the minister would meet regularly with me and with the deputy secretary and that it's very likely and I'm sure we can confirm this that meetings took place around the time of Senate estimates, but that's just the normal order of business. I have no recollection of the minister providing any negative feedback to Mr. Chisum about any aspect of his performance at
any negative feedback to anyone else about his performance?
>> I can't comment on conversations which which I don't know if they even exed or not. So that's such a hypothetical question I can't even begin to answer.
>> Well, it's not hypothetical at all. I'm just asking.
>> Am I aware of any conversation that I'm not aware of? No, I'm not.
>> And were we just at that time were you were you on leave during that time? I
came back from leave um towards the back end of the week in which the Optus um outage occurred. So I think I was
>> So you weren't on leave immediately following You were on leave immediately following that hearing. So you're not
>> No, I was on I was in the room for that hearing
>> because I think he was acting just he was acting secretary, wasn't he?
>> Yes, that's right. So he was acting secretary um through to the Friday I believe on which the um uh Optus communicated with us around the trip outage. uh and I um returned to the role of secretary on the Monday and Senate estimates happened I think a week after that.
>> So it's it's my understanding that there was a meeting in her office immediately following that hearing >> uh and that the minister expressed her unhappiness to Mr. Chisum and that triggered your decision to place him on
extended leave. Uh that's I have no um reason to believe that's an accurate representation. I'm just that I don't recognize any of that as being true.
>> Well, what I'd ask you to do, you were on leave during that period. Could you please
>> I was on leave up until um the end of the week in which the Optus outage occurred. I came back into the role of secretary on the Monday after that um Mr. Chism have been standing in for me and I was secretary at the time when we gave evidence to the hearing of Senate estimates to which you're referring and I was secretary at a time when any subsequent conversations would have taken place with the minister and I don't recognize your characterization of any discussions that took place.
Secretary, if I could ask on notice also for any messaging, correspondence, WhatsApp messages on any other platform in relation to these matters, in relation to Mr. Chisum. Are any other concerns or any correspondence in relation to Mr. Chisum between your department and the minister's office? uh in any form
>> I'll take that on that.
>> Thank you. Uh ch I'd like to now hand over to
>> Well, before I give Senator McGrath the call, I'll give Hansen Young an opportunity to ask questions in