Report on the Investigation of Alleged Misconduct concerning Dr Neale Fong, Director General of the Department of Health
- Report length
- 92 pages
Summary
The report's own summary: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, pages 7 to 12
Generated summary: written by an AI model from the report text and checked against the cited pages.
The Corruption and Crime Commission investigated the health department’s director general over his relationship and communications with a lobbyist.
Report on the Investigation of Alleged Misconduct concerning Dr Neale Fong, Director General of the Department of Health.pdf, page 7 · Report on the Investigation of Alleged Misconduct concerning Dr Neale Fong, Director General of the Department of Health.pdf, page 8
The Commission formed misconduct opinions about his misleading account to his minister and his failure to report a claimed disclosure of Cabinet information.
It also formed a serious misconduct opinion about his disclosure of a restricted matter concerning an investigation.
Its five recommendations covered consideration of disciplinary action and prosecution, referral of information-handling concerns, and government standards for retaining emails.
In the body's own words
- Opinion
The Commission does not accept that he had no recollection whatsoever of any email contact at all between August 2004 and June 2006.
- Opinion
Further, pursuant to section 22(1) of the CCC Act the Commission has formed the opinion that Dr Fong has engaged in serious misconduct within the meaning of section 4(c) of the CCC Act, by disclosing a restricted matter concerning an investigation into Mr Michael Moodie, contrary to section 167 and a notation under s.99 of the CCC Act.
Findings and recommendations
Allegations are not findings. A commission's finding or opinion of corrupt conduct or misconduct is not a finding that a person is guilty of a criminal offence, and the commissions say so in their reports.
No findings or recommendations are reproduced in this record. This does not establish that the report contains none.
Published responses
No published response was found.
Notes on this record
- Report type assigned by OPAX from the title; the Commission tags every listing item Report.
Coverage
This publisher
- The Commission's website has no copyright or licence page; reports carry the Commission's copyright notice (fair dealing only), so OPAX keeps short verbatim extracts with citations and links the original PDFs.
- Only the reports listing (/publications/reports) is covered. Annual reports, quarterly reports filed under /quarterly-reports, media releases and news items are not report records.
- The listing date is the date the Commission's page was created; the record date is the report's cover date or the tabling date stated on the page where one is given, and the listing date only as a fallback.
- Opinions are extracted only where the Commission states them in a sentence on a single page; opinions in older reports framed differently, or split over a page break, are not extracted (findings not_extracted).
- No text layer, no OCR: scanned reports have no extracted opinions or recommendations.