Andrew, was this one of the six?

[Matthew Of Canberra]

April last year:

"Smith announces at least six inquiries too many"

blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/smith_announces_at_least_six_inquiries_too_many/

The problem is Smith didn’t announce one inquiry, but at least seven or eight - including inquiries, or actually predetermined outcomes, into issues only peripheral to the incident that sparked this furore

But the minister still appears to be resolute in making those decisions. The result is that we're starting to see the results of those inquiries, and perhaps the word "vindicated" would be appropriate?

www.hreoc.gov.au/defencereview/index.html

and

www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/leaked-report-backs-smiths-stand-against-academy-chief-20120308-1unbk.html#ixzz1oYrAnEGR

and

www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-14/dla-piper-investigation-executive-summary/4071664

www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-14/defence-report-details-horrific-tales-of-abuse/4071324

Now, andrew, were any of these included in your list of 7 or 8 reviews announced by stephen smith last year? If so, which two do you think were unnecessary?

Andrew observed last year that smith appeared to be using the skype affair as an opportunity "driven more by ideology than by a desire to right a specific wrong to an individual".

Maybe (and this is just maybe) the minister has been around canberra long enough to have heard the stories. Maybe he did, indeed, see the skype affair as an opportunity. If nobody starts an inquiry without knowing the outcome, it appears that smith had a pretty good idea what he was looking for. As, I suspect, would his liberal predecessors. So maybe the REAL question isn't "why now", but "why not 10 years ago"? The libs seemed to prefer a "pay it out and keep it quiet" approach.

There's been a lot of talk over at the pull factor about people apologizing when they're wrong. I think an opportunity might be presenting itself - to lead by example.

Or maybe we should wait for the other three or four inquiries to report?

I don't have it in for the ADF. I've just been paying attention. I would hate to imagine that the treatment of women in the ADF might ever get to be as bad as it is alleged to be among parts of the US (mostly army, I believe). Maybe this is a well-timed and well-placed sock-pulling-up exercise that could head off very big problems later. Maybe we've just got a minister who hasn't been "captured" by the department.

[chookmustard]

.


Summary of each of the reviews

The review of the use of alcohol in the ADF

Professor Margaret Hamilton, an executive member of the Australian National Council on Drugs, led an independent panel to review the overall strategy for managing the use of alcohol in the ADF.

Immediate and specific initiatives include:

The preparation of an evidence-based alcohol management strategy for implementation within Defence;
Defence to ensure that the pricing of alcohol available at Defence establishments is consistent with the alcohol management strategy;
Developing an approach to collecting and responding to alcohol related data to enhance its value in terms of managing individuals and strategic planning; this will include alcohol screening of individuals at recruitment and across important career transition points, particularly post-deployment, and a whole of ADF Alcohol Incident Reporting System;
Commanders to assess situations in which alcohol is proposed to be used informally or formally and where specific approval would then be required for the use and access to alcohol within ADF work location; and
Defence to form alliances and partnerships with other organisations and individual experts on alcohol outside Defence to provide their input into alcohol policy and program development and implementation.

The review of personal conduct of ADF personnel

Major General Craig Orme led this review with a focus on assessing the effectiveness and current policies governing ADF conduct, and identifying areas of strength and weakness.

The ADF Personal Conduct Review recommends a culture that is just and inclusive.

The Australian Defence Force will more explicitly state values and behaviours on enlistment, and reinforce them through education and practice.

The Navy, Army and Air Force will continue to improve avenues of communication for members to report concerns about personal conduct through the formal chain of command and through confidential methods of reporting.

The review of the use of social media in Defence

Mr Rob Hudson, from the external consulting company George Patterson Y & R, led a team to examine the impact of the use of social media in Defence, with the aim of developing measures to ensure that the use of new technologies is consistent with ADF and Defence values.

Immediate and specific initiatives include:

All policies relating to the use of social media, the internet or cyber activities to be reviewed, including guidelines being reviewed to ensure they are consistent with the overall social media policy and engagement principles;
Defence should consider reviewing social media training and the way it is prioritised and delivered in order to ensure consistency, including relevant resources, guidelines and support mechanisms; and
Resources will be provided to support the understanding and management of social media in Defence.

The review of Defence Australian Public Service women’s leadership pathways

The review into Defence as an employer of women was led by the former Deputy Public Service Commissioner, Ms Carmel McGregor, who examined the effectiveness of current strategies and proposed recommendations across a range of issues regarding employment pathways for Defence APS women.

Ms McGregor has subsequently been appointed to the position of Deputy Secretary People Strategies and Policy in Defence.

Immediate and specific initiatives include:

The Secretary to issue an explicit statement to senior leaders and staff to reinforce the importance of gender diversity to build a sustainable workforce;
The establishment of a rotation program for senior women at Senior Executive Service Band 2/3 with the broader APS;
Ensure female membership in senior decision-making bodies;
Implement a development program for Executive Level women that includes job rotation, as well as over-representing women in existing development programs;
Embed a focus on identifying and developing women for leadership roles, including a facilitated shadowing and coaching component, in the new talent management system;
Establish a central maternity leave pool for central management of the full-time equivalent liability associated with maternity leave.

The review of the management of incidents and complaints

The Inspector General ADF, Mr Geoff Earley, conducted a review of the management of incidents and complaints in Defence, with specific reference to the treatment of victims, transparency of processes and the jurisdictional interface between military and civil law.

Immediate and specific initiatives in response to the review include:

Funding to be provided as a matter of priority to contract out the task of reducing the current grievance backlog of cases to suitably qualified legal firms;
Training and information to be provided to ADF members in relation to the management of incidents and complaints will be simplified and improved;
Defence’s administrative policies to be amended to provide for administrative suspension from duty, including the circumstances in which a Commander may suspend an ADF member and the conditions which may be imposed on the suspended member; and
An improved process to manage grievances in Defence will also be developed.
Review into the Treatment of Women in the Australian Defence Force

Ms Elizabeth Broderick, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, and her team (panel members Marian Baird, Sam Mostyn, Mark Ney and Damian Powell) conducted the Australian Human Rights Commission Review into the Treatment of Women in the Australian Defence Force (ADF).

The Review was conducted in two phases.

Phase One of the Review – into the Treatment of Women at ADFA – was tabled in Parliament on 3 November 2011. Phase One of the Review found that there have been positive improvements in the culture at the Academy since the mid-1990s. The Review acknowledged that the experiences of both male and female midshipmen and officer cadets at the Academy are for the most part positive.

However, the Review also found widespread, low-level sexual harassment, inadequate levels of supervision, a cumbersome complaints processes and an equity and diversity environment marked by sanction rather than positive engagement. The Review also identified areas in ADFA’s culture which could be improved and recommended improvements to issues including providing quality staffing at ADFA, management of complaints, accommodation for students and mechanisms to better manage the risk of injury to female cadets.

Phase Two of the Review – into the Treatment of Women in the ADF – was tabled in the Parliament in August 2011.

Phase Two of the Review dealt comprehensively with the career of women in the ADF from recruitment and retention to career choices, work-life balance practices and policies, leadership and more disturbing topics such as sexual harassment, discrimination and sexual assault.

Phase Two of the Review made 21 recommendations covering five key principles that aim to:

Actively promote a broad organisational understanding of diversity as both a core Defence value and an operational imperative linked to capability and operational effectiveness;
Address the significant under-representation of women at decision making level;
Increase the number of women recruited to the ADF as a whole, but also to specific occupational areas and units;
Improve the level to which the ADF assists serving women and men to balance their work and family commitments; and
Establish a new and more robust approach to responding to unacceptable sexual behaviours and attitudes.
 

I found 6 reviews. What other reviews is Andy talking about?