Mike Pezzullo’s spectacular fall from grace – Part 3
· Michael West
Mike Pezzullo was arguably the most powerful public servant in Australia. His fall from power and grace was quick. Rex Patrick on the report that condemned him, part 3.
MWM obtained the ‘Pezzullo report’ after a long FOI battle. In parts one and two, we reported on its content and the first of the seven allegations against him; here, we report on two more.
Visit afnews.co.za for more information.
In addition to being found to have fallen “well below the standards of due care and diligence expected of APS employees,” and “failed to act with respect and courtesy to Ministers and Secretaries,” the report’s author, Lynelle Briggs, also found Pezzullo to have failed to maintain confidentially of sensitive information.
Confidentiality breaches
It is not in contest that Mr Pezzullo communicated with Mr Briggs on sensitive or confidential government-related matters, disclosed aspects of his dealings with various Ministers and Ministerial offices to Mr Briggs, and discussed the formulation or implementation of government policies and/or programs with Mr Briggs.
The mandarin who got caught. Mike Pezzullo inquiry details revealed
By sending the relevant messages to Mr Briggs, not only did Mr Pezzullo regularly communicate with Mr Briggs on sensitive government-related matters, but he also breached Ministerial confidentiality on a number of occasions. Lynelle Briggs stated:
“Mr Pezzullo’s conduct was made worse by the fact that Mr Briggs did not hold the security clearances that may otherwise have provided some protection.”
The thrust of this allegation is that Mr Pezzullo communicated with Mr Briggs on matters in respect of which he was under a duty of confidentiality, and that his messaging with Mr Briggs touched on matters that were confidential and sensitive.
Lynelle Briggs pointed out that Mr Briggs was not subject to the Australian Public Service Code and did not hold a security clearance.
The report did not go into the details of the sensitive material, but the report found, on the balance of probability, that this allegation was substantiated.
It is also clear from the report that one of the defences Mr Pezzullo advanced in the inquiry was that the information was not classified. Lynnelle Briggs did not accept that Mr Pezzullo’s confidentiality obligations under the Code are limited to classified information, rather,
the duty of a public servant must extend to any sensitive information to which the person has been exposed in their employment and which has not been made publicly available.
“This includes information that has been the subject of limited consultation with external stakeholders, who would be expected to exercise discretion over the discussion and disclosure of that information”.
She went on to find,
“…any dealings with Ministers or Ministers’ offices are to be treated with appropriate confidentiality in order to protect ‘sensitive information’ to which they may be privy. This obligation is couched in exceptionally broad terms and in my view has been contravened by reason of Mr Pezzullo’s disclosures to Mr Briggs.”
Failing to act apolitically
The fourth of the allwegations was that Mr Pezzullo was alleged to have behaved in a manner that sought to influence political events or impose their political views on or at their work.
Specifically, he was accused of inserting his views and intervening in Ministerial appointments, which are rightly the purview of the Prime Minister and elected politicians more generally.
Much of the report’s analysis on this allegation is redacted (and still subject to challenge by MWM), but involved dealing with the proposition that Mr Pezzullo sought to influence political events and impose his political views on outcomes in the course of his employment and using his contact with Mr Briggs as a means to advance his views on various matters with two Prime Ministers.
Here, too, the allegations were substantiated. Lynelle Briggs found that hat the messages exchanged between Mr Pezzullo and Mr Briggs include various statements attributed to Mr Pezzullo which, objectively viewed, are not apolitical.
“It is also relevant to note that messages with this tenor obtained throughout the course of the Inquiry are not fleeting or sporadic. Rather, they have been exchanged extensively and consistently with Mr Briggs, who was a known confidant of Prime Ministers Mr Turnbull and Mr Morrison and furthermore, a non-APS employed Liberal Party powerbroker.”
Lynelle Briggs found that Pezzullo has overstepped the divide between usual public sector discourse and engagement in the political domain.
“In the circumstances, I have no doubt that some Ministers in both of the major political parties would be unlikely to trust Mr Pezzullo to work apolitically and would fear that he could undermine their positions through the use of back-door political channels.”
“Based on this evidence, I am satisfied that a reasonable person would not conclude that Mr Pezzullo could serve any Government of the day impartially in circumstances where he has engaged in voluminous and ongoing exchanges with Mr Briggs.”
In part 4, we will deal with the remainder of the allegations.
https:/michaelwest.com.au/mike-pezzullo-a-gossiper-who-loved-to-peddle-his-influence