Whistleblowers’ safety on agenda
People who blow the whistle on wrongdoing by their employers look set to get more legal protection, with rewards for whistleblowing also up for discussion.
State Services Minister Chris Hipkins said the Government had begun reviewing the protections offered by the Protected Disclosures Act to see if there were ‘‘gaps and weaknesses’’ in the law.
Recent analysis and misconduct cases suggested the act lagged international practice in a number of key areas, he said.
‘‘It is crucial that employees feel safe to report cases of serious misconduct. Getting this right is critical to building public confidence in the integrity of government and business in New Zealand,’’ he said.
‘‘Anyone who raises issues of serious misconduct or wrongdoing needs to have faith that their role, reputation, and career development will not be jeopardised.’’
Hipkins said the review would begin next week with ‘‘a series of targeted workshops’’.
It is understood that the agenda for the workshops will include: penalties for retaliation against whistleblowing; rewards and compensation for whistleblowing; whether people who blow the whistle on wrongdoing to the media should be protected; and what body should oversee whistleblowing complaints.
Later, a discussion document will be put out for public consultation.
Victoria University professor Michael Macaulay, who led a research project into whistleblowing with Australia’s Griffiths University, noted last year that some Australian state governments already supported whistleblowers who contact journalists in some situations.
For example, the New South Wales government protects people who contact the media if they have not had success having their ‘‘honest concerns’’ properly investigated by a relevant higher authority.
Another focus of the review is likely to be whether whistleblowers should continue to be forced to take a personal grievance case to seek redress if they suffer retaliation for whistleblowing.
Hawke’s Bay secretary Deborah Houston – who blew the whistle on a conflict of interest at the Hawke’s Bay District Health Board in 2006 and later lost her job – said through her husband last year that a dedicated agency or unit was needed to monitor whistleblowing complaints and compensate people who suffered retaliation.
Houston said speaking up had cost her her career, and argued that victims of retaliation could not rely on employment law for redress. ‘‘If the employer has got deep pockets, they can just blow you away.’’
A report by the British-based Institute of Business Ethics last year said New Zealand businesses had some catching up to do with regard to the systems they had in place to encourage ethical conduct.
‘‘Enabling employees to speak up is fundamental to risk management and reputation, but it is rarely seen in this positive light,’’ the institute’s New Zealand representative, Jane Arnott, said.