Mangocube email scandal resurfaces in latest integrity twist

It’s the Queensland Government scandal that just won’t go away, and it has emerged yet again amid the latest integrity crisis.

The Queensland Government’s integrity crisis has deepened, with allegations a senior state official felt pressured to water down a scathing report into cabinet minister Mark Bailey’s private email affair.

A Sunday Mail investigation has unearthed a confidential report by State Archivist Mike Summerell into the so-called Mangocube email scandal, in which he canvasses if the minister could face criminal prosecution over “multiple breaches” of state laws and warns the use of private email account for official purposes was widespread among ministers and ministerial staff.

The explosive report dated September 5, 2017, was handed to Leeanne Enoch, the then minister for science and innovation, but never released.

A Sunday Mail investigation has found senior government bureaucrats and spin doctors whitewashed the report to protect Mr Bailey, and Mr Summerell sought advice from Integrity Commissioner Nikola Stepanov complaining of interference and pressure to tone down his report.

At the time of the controversy Mr Bailey said he had unreservedly apologised to Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk for the saga.

The Government has been under fire on three integrity fronts, with pressure mounting for a royal-commission-style inquiry, although yesterday Treasurer Cameron Dick brushed away the calls.

Mr Bailey was accused of using his private [e-mail] email for official business in breach of the Public Records Act and was also under investigation for his attempt to delete the account after it was exposed.

Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk

In his damning report, Mr Summerell said Mr Bailey’s attempts to delete his emails “can’t be explained through simple mistake or ignorance”.

“The State Archivist considers that there are multiple grounds to argue that the actions of Minister Bailey are consistent with (sic) breach of section 13 of the Public Records Act and are of such significance in terms of number and importance of the records to consider prosecution under the Public Records Act and any other relevant legislation,’’ the report said.

“However, the State Archivist also recognises the difficulties in prosecution given the fact the records were recovered when the account was reactivated …’’

Mr Bailey was cleared by the Crime and Corruption Commission of any criminal conduct in 2017, with Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk putting him back on the frontbench after briefly standing him aside.

The watchdog found there was no grounds to pursue a criminal prosecution of Mr Bailey for his use of the private email or his management of public records in the account.

The CCC came to this decision after reviewing the work of the State Archivist.

The report blew the whistle on the widespread practice of conducting official business on private email by ministers and staff, implicating other key Palaszczuk leaders, including Speaker Curtis Pitt, Deputy Premier Steven Miles and Works Minister Mick de Brenni.

“The widespread nature and frequency of this practice was disturbing,” Mr Summerell wrote. “The failure to adequately capture the public records of a minister and his or her office is a serious omission and arguably attacks the transparency and accountability of government.”

The report is in the hands of anti-corruption crusader Michael Hart, the Member for Burleigh who intends to raise the report in parliament.

“The serious allegations raised by Mr Summerell make a mockery of Annastacia Palaszczuk’s claims of honesty and integrity in government,” he said.

Minister Mark Bailey

Mr Hart said public records were a cornerstone of good government.

“Labor has trashed that principle,” Mr Hart said.

Mr Summerell confirmed he wrote the report but declined to discuss it. He did say he had sought advice from Dr Stepanov complaining of “interference” and pressure to tone down his report.

Last week Mr Summerell, who claims he was forced out of his job last year for raising integrity issues, broke cover to support Dr Stepanov, who left in a separate integrity scandal.

Mr Summerell and Dr Stepanov backed calls for an inquiry after her computer was seized in a raid on her office.

In his report, Mr Summerell singled out Bailey staffers Denise Spinks and David Shankey for “frequently engaging with the minister by their private email accounts that were clearly related to the minister’s official portfolio responsibilities”.

He suggested Mr Bailey breached four sections of the Act.

He said it had to be considered “whether it was in the public interest to seek a prosecution of minister Bailey” and that prosecuting him would send a message to others.

He also said action against Mr Bailey may be viewed as “scapegoating”, as the practises “have potential to be widespread”.

Nevertheless, he had “concerns” about the “completeness and integrity” of data released by Mr Bailey.

Mr Summerell stressed he was not making a judgment about the content of the hidden emails. There were 1199 public records identified within Mr Bailey’s email account. He improperly deleted 660 “without authorisation”.

“These records document potential decisions he has made as minister of state, the factors influencing those decisions and how those decisions were implemented,” he said.

Mr Summerell said while Mr Bailey deleted accounts, most were recovered, making it difficult to prosecute him.

Mike Summerell

“The State Archivist’s view is that Mr Bailey’s likely purpose on deletion was permanent destruction of the records,” he said.

“However, he does recognise the difficulty in proving beyond reasonable doubt the minister’s state of mind or intent at the time the account was deleted.’’

He added: “The significant irony is that quite appropriately seeking to recover the records to undertake their investigation, the CCC may well have made it difficult to prosecute Mr Bailey for unauthorised disposal of public records under Section 13 of the Act.”

In 2017 the CCC said it could not identify any evidence pointing to corrupt conduct by Mr Bailey. Mr Summerell said in his report that bureaucrats had tried to stifle his work.

“It must be stressed there was no attempt to interfere with the investigation itself. However, there were instances where the ability of the State Archivist to undertake statutory functions was impeded,’’ he said.

The Sunday Mail has also obtained a letter sent by Dr Stepanov to Mr Summerell in which she raises alarm about government interference.

“The public expects transparency and honesty, and rightly so,” Dr Stepanov wrote.

“Therefore, any strategy that proposes to withhold crucial facts of an investigation from the minister … is critically flawed and counter-productive. If a decision is made to deliberately withhold information from the investigative report so as to present an alternative, sanitised account of the actual events, it will reflect poorly on your conduct … and limit the opportunity for Minister Enoch to get ahead of the facts, make informed choices and resolve any issues in favour of the public’s interest.

“In the interest of integrity and ethics … I would strongly advise that you … present the Director-General and Minister with the report in its original form, save for the inclusion of the findings of the CCC.”

Mr Summerell told The Sunday Mail he was very grateful for the advice.

“I can confirm I followed that advice and provided my full and final independent report on my investigation … to the director-general of DSITI on October 27, 2017,” he said.

The Premier would not address allegations in the report.

A spokesman said: “The same archivist’s report was the basis of the CCC investigation.

“It found no wrongdoing.”