Skip to content

OPAX is on iPhone and iPad. Get the app

Menu

Report into misconduct risks with access to confidential information in the Office of the Auditor General v2

Report · Corruption and Crime Commission (WA CCC) · Western Australia · Published

Findings, opinions and statements
4
Recommendations
1
Report length
29 pages

Official source

Report into misconduct risks with access to confidential information in the Office of the Auditor General v2

PDF · 29 pages · 1.1 MB · ccc.wa.gov.au

Summary

The report's own summary: Overview, pages 4 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 risks involving confidential information at the Office of the Auditor General.

    Report, page 4

  • The Commission found that inadequate access controls allowed two auditors to obtain private information about colleagues.

    Report, page 4 · Report, page 5

  • The Commission identified a risk from police names and addresses retained on a laptop after an audit, while finding no evidence that the information was shared.

    Report, page 6

  • The Commission formed an opinion of serious misconduct concerning an auditor's deliberate destruction of an encrypted storage device and its data.

    Report, page 26 · Report, page 27

  • The Commission stressed that its misconduct opinion did not establish guilt of a criminal or disciplinary offence.

    Report, page 27

  • The Commission made five recommendations covering access restrictions, secure retention of audit data, internal checks and staff education.

    Report, page 28 · Report, page 29

Findings, opinions and statements 4

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.

  1. no opinion of serious misconduct

    No finding

    In what follows, the Commission stresses there is no evidence that sensitive or confidential information was shared or distributed, so no opinion of serious misconduct has been formed in respect of the significant data breaches.

    Report, page 12

  2. no opinion of serious misconduct

    No finding

    Officer one's actions in relation to the access of data of the OAG do not reach the threshold for an opinion of serious misconduct.

    Report, page 15

  3. no opinion of serious misconduct

    No finding

    In the Commission's opinion, officer two's actions were naïve and silly in the extreme, but do not meet the threshold necessary for an opinion of serious misconduct.

    Report, page 18

  4. opinion of serious misconduct

    Opinion

    In the circumstances, an opinion of serious misconduct is appropriate.

    Report, page 27

Recommendations 1

  1. Recommendation

    The Commission recommends that OAG review its procedures to ensure that following an audit, data is only retained in a secure location.

    Report, page 28

Published responses

No published response was found.

Official documents 2

Notes on this record

  • Report type assigned by OPAX from the title; the Commission tags every listing item Report.
  • Date is the date the Commission's report page was published; the report states no date OPAX read.
  • 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.

Record snapshot: · This record as JSON