Parliamentary committee reviews of police oversight agencies: A Queensland case study

Parliamentary committee reviews of police oversight agencies: A Queensland case study

Dr Lyndel Bates, CARRS-Q Peter Rogers, Queensland Parliamentary Service

1

Overview• Civilian oversight• Model accountability system• Crime and Misconduct Commission• Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct

Committee• Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct

Commissioner• Three year reviews

2

Civilian oversight• Aims to enhance accountability and

confidence in police organisations (Porter & Prenzler, 2012a)

• Ensure police organisations act with integrity (Filstad & Gottschalk, 2011; Prenzler & Lewis, 2005)

• Powers and functions vary between jurisdictions (Porter & Prenzler, 2012b)

3

Model accountability system

4

Cross-Party Parliamentary

Oversight Committee

Inspector

Public Sector Integrity

Commission

Politicians Police Public sector Local government

Government commercial

entities

Adapted from Prenzler, 2009

Crime and Misconduct Commission (1)

• CMC is an independent statutory body• Commenced on 1 January 2002• Established under the Crime and

Misconduct Act 2001• Range of coercive powers under the Act

Crime and Misconduct Commission, 2012; Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee, 2012; Lewis, 2010; den Heyer and Beckley, 2013)

5

Crime and Misconduct Commission (2)

• Combating and reducing the incidence of major crime

• Improving the integrity of the public sector• Other areas

– Research and prevention– Intelligence– Witness protection– Civil confiscation of the proceeds of crime

Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee, 2012

6

Accountability of CMC

7

Parliament and the people of

Queensland

Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct

Committee

Crime and Misconduct Commission

Commissioners

Parliamentary Commissioner

The Minister (performance

reporting)

Parliaments and public sector integrity agencies

• Parliaments create public sector integrity agencies

• Parliaments are the mechanism by which public sector integrity agencies remain accountable

Wettenhall, 2012

8

Role of the Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct

Committee• Monitor and review the CMC• Report to the Parliament on relevant

matters relating to CMC• Assist in the appointment process of CMC

chairperson and part-time commissioners

9

Activities of the PCMC (1)• Examine reports provided by CMC • Consider minutes of meetings of the CMC

and its executive• Regular bi-monthly meetings between

PCMC and Chairperson and senior CMC officers

• Regular meetings with the parliamentary commissioner

10

Activities of the PCMC (2)• Receives and considers complaints

against CMC and its officers• Reviews CMC reports• Examines CMC performance measures• Requests reports from CMC on matters• Audits CMC registers and files regarding

use of CMC powers (may be done by commissioner)

• Can conduct inquiries11

Differences with other parliamentary committees

• PCMC continues in existence even after the dissolution of Parliament

• Chair is non-government member• Attachment of a parliamentary officer,

known as the Parliamentary Commissioner, to the committee

12

Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Commissioner (1)• Has roles under several Acts• Directed by the committee• Investigates complaints against the CMC• Audits and reviews CMC performance• Has coercive powers • Can order to CMC officers to attend

hearings or to produce records, documents and things

Lewis, 2010

13

Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Commissioner (2)• Part-time role• Minimum tenure is two years• Maximum tenure is five years• Needs to have served as, or be qualified

for appointment as, a judge in either the Supreme Court, the High Court of Australia or the Federal Court of Australia

• Appointment requires bipartisan committee support

14

Three year reviews (1)• Review of CMC activities – 2004, 2006,

2009, 2012• Report may make recommendations to

amend the Act• All recommendations must be considered

by the Queensland Government• Must respond within three – six months of

report being tabled

15

Three year reviews (2)• PCMC issues media release• Places an advertisement calling for

submissions• PCMC writes to stakeholders inviting

written submissions• Hold public hearings• Parliamentary Commissioner involved in

all reviews

16

PCMC reports on reviews of the CMC

Review Tabling date Number of pages

Number of recommendations

2004 15 March 2004 122 50

2006 9 October 2006 122 28

2009 20 April 2009 123 29

2012 10 May 2012 185 38

17

Publicly available written submissions to reviews of the

CMC

182004 review 2006 review 2009 review 2012 review

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Publicly available submissions made to PCMC review of the CMC by type of submitter and review

2004 2006 2009 20120

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Qld government departmentOther Qld public sectorMP (inc. Ministers)Local councilsOther

19

Publicly available submissions by category of submitter2004 review

OverseenNot overseen

2006 review

OverseenNot overseen

20

Publicly available submissions by category of submitter2009 review

OverseenNot overseen

2012 review

21

OverseenNot overseen

Number of confidential submissions by review

2004 2006 2009 20120

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

ConfidentialNot confidential

22

Ongoing developments• Two recent reviews• Queensland Government appointed an

advisory panel to advise on the Crime and Misconduct Act– 61 submissions to this review

• PCMC investigation into CMC’s release and destruction of Fitzgerald Inquiry documents

23

Conclusions• Queensland system similar to model

proposed by Prenzler (2009)• Assists in making integrity commission

accountable to Parliament and the electorate

• Number of written submissions to 3 year review falling

• Need for research to understand role of parliamentary committees in oversight

24

ReferencesCrime and Misconduct Commission. 2012. Annual Report 2011-12. Brisbane: Crime and Misconduct

Commission.den Heyer, G and A Beckley. 2013. "Police independent oversight in Australia and New Zealand." Police

Practice and Research: An International Journal.Filstad, C and P Gottschalk. 2011. "Performance evaluation of police oversight agencies." Policing and

Society: An International Journal of Research and Policy 21 (1): 96-109.Lewis, C. 2010. "Crime and Misconduct Commission: Moving away from Fitzgerald." In The Fitzgerald Legacy:

Reforming Public Life in Australia and Beyond, edited by C Lewis, J Ransley and R Homel, 57-80. Brisbane: Australian Academic Press.

Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee. 2012. Annual Report 2011/2012. Brisbane: Queensland Parliament.

Porter, L and T Prenzler. 2012a. "Police oversight in the United Kingdom: The balance of independence and collaboration." International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice 40 (3): 152-171.

Porter, L and T Prenzler. 2012b. "Corruption prevention and complaint management." In Policing and Security in Practice: Challenges and Achievements, edited by T Prenzler, 130-148. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Prenzler, T. 2009. Police Corruption: Preventing Misconduct and Maintaining Integrity. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor and Francis.

Prenzler, T and C Lewis. 2005. "Performance Indicators for Police Oversight Agencies." Australian Journal of Public Administration 64 (2): 77-83.

Wettenhall, R. 2012. "Integrity agencies: the significance of the parliamentary relationship." Policy Studies 33 (1): 65-78.

25

Thank youQuestions?Dr Lyndel Bates

Lyndel.Bates@qut.edu.au

Peter RogersPeter.Rogers@parliament.qld.gov.au

26