Qld integrity crisis: Mike Summerell rejects Annastacia Palaszczuk’s claims he didn’t raise issues

The former state archivist turned whistleblower has hit back after the Premier queried why he hadn’t raised concerns previously.

Outspoken former state archivist Mike Summerell has hit back at Annastacia Palaszczuk after she questioned why he failed to voice concerns about integrity while employed with the Queensland Government.

The Premier, who faced further questions about political interference and integrity within her Government today, said Mr Summerell’s concerns about the independence of his office and practices within the public service should have been raised when he left.

Mr Summerell, who left the role last year, called the Premier’s response “extremely disappointing”, saying he had constantly raised grievances through the department his direct manager and others.

“I have raised my concerns constantly for three years from 2018 onwards as they arose and they never stopped being raised, and they were never resolved at all; in fact efforts were constantly made to hide the concerns I expressed,” he said.

“I exhausted myself trying to fight to do the right thing and seeking improvements to a broken system with no support.

“Why have I raised them again now is very obvious; recent events I feel show integrity in Queensland is under grave threat and the public should be informed of that fact.

“I felt a need to step up and support key integrity figures in Queensland and the staff I left at Queensland State Archives. I encourage others to step up as well.”

Mr Summerell said there were multiple briefs that should have been provided to the minister and/or the director-general of the department noting his concerns about deficiencies in the legislation, urgent amendments to Public Records Act and other matters.

“On multiple occasions these briefs were not progressed by officials after they had been submitted,” he said.

Former state archivist Mike Summerell

“There are extensive email trails recording the conversations with officials in the department regarding my concerns as to interference in investigations, interference in the creation of the annual reports, interference in the Barbagallo investigation, the inability to obtain legal advice, the independence of my role and other matters.”

Mr Summerell said he had a “paranoia about keeping things on the record” and declared that despite the widespread practice of bureaucrats avoiding written communication, using phone calls and face-to-face meetings for contentious issues, he ensured “there is an extensive audit trail which supports each and everyone of the allegations and criticisms I have made”.

He said he had raised extensive concerns in reports to the Crime and Corruption Commission and his director-general in 2017, and in 2018 he had flagged further worries about the independence of the state archivist and the “minister’s failure to support the recommendation to review the Public Records Act” to the relevant committee.

Mr Summerell said his attempts to raise concerns through the annual report were “interfered with in both 2017-18 and 2019-20”.

“The annual report was intended to be a primary mechanism to ensure my independence and to allow me to raise concerns about the administration of the Act, non-compliance and to provide my recommendations for improvement,” he said.

“For two years that ability was intentionally removed.

“My concerns were formally communicated each and every time this occurred in writing and were retained.”

He said he had worked extensively with the CCC since 2017 on a number of different investigations and knew well the limits to its investigative powers.

In response to Ms Palaszczuk questioning why he did not raise concerns while he was employed by the Government, Mr Summerell said “careful what you ask for”.

Ms Palaszczuk said recommendations made by Mr Summerell in the wake of an investigation into Transport Minister Mark Bailey’s emails had been implemented or were in progress.

However, a spokesman for Arts Minister Leeanne Enoch was later unable to specifically reveal what recommendations had been completed, were being progressed or were not implemented.