Coroner & Legal
The Mason Report
Tasmania’s auditor-general has found the selection process for the current Commissioner for Children Aileen Ashford was thorough, objective and free from bias.
But he found the selection panel’s report to the Minister did not provide persuasive evidence of a thorough, logical and objective selection process.
In his report just released, Mike Blake is critical of Minister Lin Thorp saying she should have asked the panel to more fully explain its reasoning.
The State Government commissioned the review after allegations the former Commissioner, Paul Mason, was dumped because of his scathing report into the case of a 12-year-old girl prostituted to more than 100 men while under state care.
The Premier Lara Giddings pre-empted the release, saying it was unlikely the Auditor-General would find anything untoward.
The Opposition Leader, Will Hodgman, says the fact that the auditor-general was called upon proves the selection process was faulty.
“Ordinarily business of this type should be handled senstively, appropriately and without having to go off to a third party, an umpire, to say whether or not it’s been well handled,” he said.
“So by implication the process was not efficient, effective or one which provided Tasmanians with confidence that this government had for once done the right thing.”
James Crotty, comment:
It is worth taking the time to read Mike Blake’s report.
http://www.audit.tas.gov.au/publications/reports/specialreport/pdfs/specialrep96.pdf
The issue of bias has been dealt with by the courts for many years on a different basis than the very difficult task of trying to demonstrate actual bias.
For a very long time the courts have said that in order to preserve confidence in the impartiality of the courts the proper test for bias is if a fair minded person might reasonably apprehend or suspect that the judge has prejudged or might prejudge a case. Justice, “should not only be done but manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”.
Read Mason’s comments set out in Blake’s report for Mason’s view. It seems clear to me that Thorp not heeding DHHS advice re the composition of the selection panel is a significant failing and one which leads on the test set out above to a reasonable perception of bias.
The result is, again, a loss of trust in the integrity and competence of Executive Government.
But there is a bright side. We are reading a report of an independent auditor general into the matter and as a result able to participate in an informed public debate. Truly amazing. Almost open government.
Think how much better government would be if it was routinely open to this sort of scrutiny.
Or put another way. Do you think the Minister would do the same again?