I speak in debate on the Ombudsman and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024. The bill comes about as the result of a request by the Ombudsman to amend legislation that governs both the functions of the NSW Ombudsman and the Ombudsman's office, which the Government has acted on. By way of background, the Ombudsman's office is an independent integrity agency that oversees the New South Wales public sector and investigates complaints regarding most government agencies, local councils and community service providers. Before coming into this place I was an elected councillor at Liverpool City Council.

Mr Mark Coure: How's that going?

Mr NATHAN HAGARTY: I got out of there as soon as the iceberg hit. I was elected in 2016, as was Mayor Wendy Waller. One of her election commitments was to appoint an ombudsman at Liverpool City Council. That person did a fantastic job of restoring trust and integrity at the council during their five years there. Sadly, that position has been removed by the current administration. Noting the comments of the member for Oatley, with the local ombudsman gone, Liverpool City Council has been in the news for what all members can agree are the wrong reasons. That is why an ombudsman at any level of government is important. It provides people with the ability to raise things with the ombudsman, which sits independent of government, to ensure the public sector acts with integrity at all times.

Regarding the original print of the bill, schedule 1 proposed amendments to the Ombudsman Act 1974, including provisions for the Ombudsman to make preliminary inquiries to determine whether the Ombudsman has jurisdiction over particular conduct, and for the purposes of any function under that Act or another. That is quite important. At times a complaint will be made to the Ombudsman about a specific person or agency and, due to the make‑up of that agency, there might be a grey area as to whether that person or agency comes under the scope of the Ombudsman. Clearing that up is quite an important change. There is also a change to the definition of ''Aboriginal program", to which the Ombudsman's jurisdiction to monitor and assess Aboriginal programs in part 3 of the Act applies. That has been changed to a general definition that includes, but is not limited to, the fancily named OCHRE, which is the Opportunity, Choice, Healing, Responsibility and Empowerment program. It is a great name; kudos to whoever came up with it. I will pay that.

The bill also seeks to repeal a provision in the Public Interest Disclosures Act 2022. I note that this week is Public Interest Disclosure Week. While we are on the topic of public integrity and trust, I encourage all public servants to enjoy this week and make sure they understand their responsibilities and provisions under the Public Interest Disclosures Act and do their bit to ensure we have a public service and a government that lives and breathes integrity every single day of the week. Happy Public Interest Disclosure Week to everybody celebrating.

The bill repeals a provision in the Public Interest Disclosures Act inserted on 1 October 2023 that is imposing unnecessary administrative burden on the Ombudsman's office. It is fantastic to be part of a Labor government that is cutting red tape. The bill also makes provision in clause 15 for an express statutory duty for a public authority to cooperate and, if asked, assist the Ombudsman in the exercise of the Ombudsman's functions, including its complaints, investigative and oversight functions.

The bill provides an express statutory power for the Ombudsman to provide a range of education and other training services and charge reasonable fees for those services, as well as making other minor miscellaneous amendments to existing provisions of the Ombudsman Act. The bill is a bit of a clean-up. Schedule 2 to the bill proposes amendments to the Community Services (Complaints, Reviews and Monitoring) Act 1993 to make minor changes of a statute law revision nature arising as a consequence of earlier amendments by the Disability Inclusion Amendment Act 2022 and consequential amendments that arise as a result of the amendments proposed to be made by the bill to the Ombudsman Act.

Schedule 3 to the bill repeals the Ombudsman Regulation 2016 because the definition of "Aboriginal programs" will now be in the Ombudsman Act rather than the regulation and the regulation does not deal with any other issues. Once again, the Government is getting some regulations off the books and cutting red tape, which is what the Minns Labor Government is all about. As members are aware, part 3B of the Ombudsman Act provides the Ombudsman with monitoring and assessment powers regarding Aboriginal programs, prescribed as the OCHRE program. The Ombudsman requested that the definition of "Aboriginal programs" be changed to a general definition that is not limited to just that program.

The first print of the bill proposed a consequential amendment providing that the Ombudsman "may" monitor and assess Aboriginal programs, instead of the words "is to". The amendment was intended to emphasis the Ombudsman's discretionary exercise of part 3B powers, consistent with the role of the Ombudsman's Office as an independent integrity agency. In the other place, contributions to the debate were made emphasising the importance of the OCHRE program and raising concerns about the proposed change from "is to" to "may". Instead of OCHRE being referred to as an example of an Aboriginal program, the first amendment included OCHRE in its own sub-paragraph of the definition followed by the more general definition.

The second amendment in the other place changed the Government's proposed drafting so that the Ombudsman "is to monitor and assess the OCHRE program" and "may monitor and assess other Aboriginal programs". While the Government does not consider the amendments to be necessary, it is prepared to accept them in the spirit of democracy. The third amendment was to omit the Government's proposed amendment to remove section 31Z from the Ombudsman Act. After the bill was passed in the Legislative Council, the Ombudsman kindly provided briefings to members of the Opposition and crossbench, including the member for Wahroonga, the Hon. Susan Carter, the member for Balmain and Ms Cate Faehrmann.

While considering that the Ombudsman has sound reasons for requesting the repeal of section 31Z, the Government accepts the decision of the Parliament to retain that provision. The Government amendment gives effect to the Legislative Council amendment, removing some consequential provisions regarding section 31Z that were not removed in the amendments made by the other place. Schedule 1 [11] and [12] in the second print of the bill will need to be removed because they omit parts of the Ombudsman Act that refer to section 31Z, and these parts should stay in if section 31Z is being retained. Again, it is a bit of a clean-up, with more red tape gone. This Government is about cleaning things up.

The Government accepts the will of the Parliament in making changes to the bill as originally proposed. For those who heard my community recognition statement yesterday in which I acknowledged the passing of Mr Democracy Manifest, Jack Karlson, the Government accepting the changes is most certainly democracy manifest. It is a great example of democracy in action: a bill is put up, it is amended in the other place, it comes back to this House, and the Government accepts it. It is fantastic to see that process working, and this is a fantastic bill. The Ombudsman's office is a fantastic agency that ensures we have the utmost integrity in the New South Wales Government.