Report on corruption in Information Technology at Horizon Power
- Findings, opinions and statements
- 5
- Recommendations
- 2
- Report length
- 68 pages
Summary
The report's own summary: INTRODUCTION, pages 5 to 7
Generated summary: written by an AI model from the report text and checked against the cited pages.
The Corruption and Crime Commission investigated procurement and private business interests involving Horizon Power’s technology manager and associates.
The Commission formed serious misconduct opinions about the manager’s use of his position to obtain benefits for his business and family.
The Commission concluded that the manager and two associates conspired to defraud Horizon Power through a business they intended to control.
The Commission did not form a serious misconduct opinion about the contractor’s conduct, distinguishing its connection to his employment from that of the manager.
The Commission made two recommendations to consider prosecutions for corruption in public office and conspiracy to commit fraud.
Findings, opinions and statements 5
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.
opinion of serious misconduct
OpinionIn his capacity as a public officer, the Commission has formed opinions of serious misconduct.
no opinion of serious misconduct
No findingCommission has not formed an opinion of serious misconduct about his actions.
opinion of serious misconduct
OpinionThe Commission has formed an opinion of serious misconduct by Mr Thomas.
opinion of serious misconduct
OpinionThe Commission forms an opinion of serious misconduct in respect of Mr Thomas.
opinion of serious misconduct
OpinionThe Commission forms an opinion of serious misconduct against former public officer, Mr Thomas, pursuant to the Corruption, Crime and Misconduct Act 2003 s 4(b).
Recommendations 2
Recommendation
The Commission recommends that a relevant authority give consideration to the prosecution of Mr Thomas for corruption in a public office contrary to the Criminal Code s 83.
Recommendation
The Commission recommends that a relevant authority give consideration to the prosecution of Mr Thomas, Mr Raspa and Mr Hesford for conspiracy to commit the indictable offence of fraud pursuant to the Criminal Code s 558, or any other offence that may be disclosed.
Published responses
No published response was found.
Official documents 2
Report on corruption in Information Technology at Horizon Power
Document details
- Role
- Report
MEDIA RELEASE - Report on corruption in Information Technology at Horizon Power
Document details
- Status
- Linked
- Role
- Media release
Notes on this record
- Report type assigned by OPAX from the title; the Commission tags every listing item Report.
- An opinion that misconduct has occurred is not, and is not to be taken as, a finding or opinion that a person has committed a criminal or disciplinary offence (Corruption, Crime and Misconduct Act 2003, s 217A; s 23 in reports made under the Act as first enacted).
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.