olivia
Ombudsman Chris Field of Western Australia has stepped down after being found guilty of serious wrongdoing by the Corruption and Crime Commission.
The CCC’s investigation showed that Field approved a lot of international travel without the Premier’s approval, costing taxpayers $223,000 in just one year.
The investigation also pointed out a big conflict of interest because Field was the president of the International Ombudsman Institute, using government resources for his international work.
Despite saying he was treated unfairly during the investigation, Field’s resignation is a big deal for the Ombudsman’s office’s reputation and raises concerns about how public service roles in WA are monitored and held accountable.
Background on Chris Field
Chris Field was the Ombudsman of Western Australia for 17 years starting from the year 2007.
He examined; grievances, oversaw verification of enforcement of accountability not only in public entities, but in government establishments as well as sought to enhance good governance.
Field also headed the International Ombudsman Institute, which grouped international ombudsman organizations.
He had to act independently and impartially dealing with the actions of the government in favour of the citizens entitlements.
In recent years, Ombudsman Chris Field’s career was investigated by the Corruption and Crime Commission which pointed out some cases of violation of the code of law and misuse of public money for private travel.
The Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) Report
The Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) report on Ombudsman Chris Field’s wrongdoings showed he was dishonest and broke the law, leading to his job as WA Ombudsman ending.
It found that Field made up a fake process to get a lot of international travel without getting the Premier’s okay, which cost taxpayers $223,000 in one year.
The CCC saw a big problem with Field using government resources for his job as president of the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI), where he did things not related to his job.
Ombudsman Chris Field also lied to the WA Treasurer about a €129,640 deal with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, saying they followed the right steps and the project would help Western Australia, which wasn’t true.
Details of Misconduct
The so-called “process” for approval of WA Ombudsman Chris Field of overseas travel circumvented an automatic requirement for ministerial approval for government funded international travel.
In deciding on his travel, the report from the Corruption and Crime Commission concluded that Field would first “make up a business case for the trip” and thereafter seek approval, usually as the subordinate signing off to allow him to go who could not overrule a decision made by him himself.
Financially, this meant it had huge implications for taxpayers with Field reportedly spending over $223,000 on international travel in one year, mainly for his job as president of the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI).
The CCC noted that these expenditures were not justifiable because they did not serve the interests of the WA public, since Field was not performing his duties as Ombudsman during these trips.
Political Reactions to Resignation
It has only been after the resignation of Chris Field from his position in the WA Ombudsman that political personalities responded vigorously about accountability and governance.
Many of the politicians weren’t pacified by the apologies given by Field and Premier Roger Cook called them stark and clear while stating that the actions of Field detailed in the report of Corruption and Crime Commission demanded action.
Ombudsman Chris Field supported the current ten-year terms for independent public servants, noting, while independence is important for such roles, the holders also have to answer to the people.
Despite all these reforms, many people especially the opposition remain uncensored, this is the seat from Shane Love who referred to the act of Field as “completely unacceptable” and called for more reforms to restore public faith in the government.
Other individuals have also come forward in response to these behaviours and research misconduct with calls for changes in systems that minimize the occurrence of near future issues.
Implications for Oversight and Accountability
The Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) has put forward a bunch of recommendations for reforming oversight following Ombudsman Chris Field of WA.
A major idea is to create a bipartisan joint committee to keep an eye on the Ombudsman’s office, which would boost accountability and make sure everything runs smoothly and transparently.
The CCC also suggested broadening the role of the Parliamentary Inspector of the Corruption and Crime Commission to include oversight of the Ombudsman, adding another layer of review.
These suggestions really underline the pressing need for better accountability in the Ombudsman’s office, stressing that independent public servants should stick to high ethical standards to keep public trust intact.
Public Response and Media Coverage
Ombudsman Chris Field has been a subject of considerable and in some cases hostile, media coverage especially on the CCC serious misconduct discoveries.
It has been claimed that Field created a ‘façade’ which was used to approve official foreign trips that were allegedly costing over $223 000 one year and he was also president of the IOI.
The media have presented the actions of Ombudsman Chris Field as having very grave consequences, presenting them as signifying a gross misuse of the public’s trust and the abuse of the very institution of the ombudsman.
Social media responses have been one of disappointment and outrage, with many people questioning the authorities’ integrity.
Ombudsman Chris Field’s resignation is the perfect moment of reference for the future of public service in Western Australia, the need for changes that enhance the public servants’ responsibility and openness.
Since the Ombudsman’s role is to fight for corresponding institutions and rebuild public trust there is the necessity to pay extra attention to ethical aspects and ethical environment.
We can draw lessons from this situation to enable major improvements that strengthen governance and protect citizens’ liberties.
