Ombudsman "sham" exposed
Print
Western Australia's Ombudsman created his own rules, and has now announced his own resignation.
A report by the Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) tabled in Western Australia's Parliament has found the state's Ombudsman, Chris Field, guilty of serious misconduct.
The CCC’s investigation scrutinised Mr Field’s extensive overseas travel as President of the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI) and his improper use of public resources for IOI-related activities.
The findings show Mr Field repeatedly bypassed established protocols and engaged in deceptive practices, all while misusing state funds and resources.
The CCC report revealed that Mr Field failed to obtain the necessary approval from the Premier for his international travel.
Instead, he created what the CCC described as “a sham process within his office” to approve his own travel.
Mr Field insisted that seeking ministerial approval would be “fundamentally against the principles of his office”, asserting that as Ombudsman, he was “accountable to no Minister, only to Parliament”.
The report criticised this stance, noting that “Mr Field's actions were a clear contravention of the established governance protocols” designed to ensure accountability for public officials.
One of the most significant findings of the report relates to a contract signed by Mr Field in August 2023 with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
The contract, valued at €129,640, was for a scan survey on the role of ombudsmen in civil society. However, no procurement process was undertaken, violating the state's procurement rules.
The CCC found that Mr Field later attempted to deceive State Treasurer Rita Saffioti by submitting a memorandum filled with inaccuracies.
The report states; “To be pellucidly clear, in the Commission’s opinion, Mr Field deliberately attempted to mislead the Treasurer to accept that the OECD Project had gone through a procurement process in accordance with the Procurement Act and Procurement Rules. Manifestly, it had not.”
The investigation further uncovered that Mr Field routinely directed staff from the Office of the Ombudsman Western Australia (OWA) to perform work related to his role as IOI President, including preparing speeches, organising travel, and drafting documents.
The CCC noted “Mr Field used resources of the State by directing staff of the OWA to work largely or exclusively on IOI work”, describing his actions as a significant misuse of public resources.
The report added that this practice began before his election as IOI President and continued during his tenure.
In addition, the CCC found that Mr Field’s conflation of his roles as Ombudsman and IOI President led to serious conflicts of interest.
“Once he began using OWA resources and OWA funds for IOI purposes, he created an unmanageable conflict of interest,” the report says.
Despite Mr Field’s insistence that the roles were “indivisible and complementary”, the CCC concluded that the overlapping responsibilities compromised his ability to perform his duties impartially.
The CCC found that “IOI gained a significant pecuniary benefit from decisions made by Mr Field,” which came at the expense of the OWA and the state.
The report also addressed instances where Mr Field failed to declare gifts and hospitality extended to him during his international travels, contrary to the policies governing his office.
The CCC highlighted that he had “authorised the purchase of gifts using OWA funds, which he presented to other IOI members and government dignitaries during the course of his travel”.
Additionally, the CCC criticised Mr Field’s attempts to justify his actions.
During his public examination, Mr Field stated that “if it had been outside of my lane, I would have instantaneously stopped being outside of that lane if any person had ever indicated that to me”.
However, the CCC emphasised that “the principal obligation to abide by the rules was on Mr Field”.
The report added that Mr Field’s continuous reliance on others to intervene, rather than proactively seeking approval or legal advice, demonstrated “arrogant disregard” for the responsibilities of his position.
The OECD project, in particular, highlighted the extent of Mr Field’s misconduct.
The CCC’s investigation found that when questioned by the Treasurer about the project, Mr Field attempted to mislead both the Treasurer and senior officials by creating false documentation.
“Mr Field has by this conduct, intended to influence persons who hold senior positions of public duty... into doing things which they would not otherwise have done,” the CCC report stated.
In its conclusion, the CCC acknowledged Mr Field’s long service as Ombudsman but made clear that his actions constituted serious misconduct.
“Independence without accountability is an illusion,” the report said.
The Commission recommended that Parliament consider establishing a joint standing committee to provide oversight of the Ombudsman and expanding the role of the Parliamentary Inspector of the Corruption and Crime Commission to include the OWA.
In response to the findings, Mr Field announced that he would resign from his position.
Despite his defence that he had acted in good faith, the CCC concluded that Mr Field’s conduct had “compromised every funding decision made by him, materially benefitting the IOI at the expense of the State”.
The full CCC report is accessible in PDF form, here.
