NT Govt expected to refer former ICAC boss Ken Fleming to Privileges Committee

The NT Government is expected to refer former anti-corruption boss Ken Fleming QC to its Privileges Committee following allegations he misled Budget Estimates and attempted to reveal the identity of a whistleblower.

Ken Fleming QC at the Budget Estimates in 2020. Picture: Che Chorley

• Lawyer says Fleming gave ‘false’ evidence against whistleblower
• Former attorneys-general call for ICAC overhaul after Fleming saga
• Ken Fleming takes holidays following Estimates appearance

THE NT Government is expected to refer former anti-corruption boss Ken Fleming QC to its Privileges Committee following allegations he misled Budget Estimates and attempted to reveal the identity of a whistleblower.

In a statement, the Government said it expected a motion to refer Mr Fleming to the Privileges Committee would be put to the Parliament when it next sits in August.

“Following conflicting evidence presented by two witnesses at the Estimates Committee, the Chair of Estimates has written to the Privileges Committee,” the statement said.

“Under standing orders, a motion in the Assembly is required to formally refer matters to the Privileges Committee. “This is expected to occur in August.”

MORE TOP NEWS

Union says concerns over former remote principal’s conduct raised years prior to ICAC complaint

CLP calls on Chief Minister to identify minister who brought Turf Club proposal to Cabinet

New NT ICAC Commissioner starts role

Mr Fleming – who retired as the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption on Monday – gave evidence to the Estimates Committee on June 15, the same day Sky News revealed his office was being investigated over an alleged conflict of interest involving contracts awarded to David McGinlay, the boyfriend of its Director of Investigations Kate Kelly. ICAC Inspector Bruce McClintock has since dismissed the complaint.

During his appearance Mr Fleming said he knew the source of the story, claiming it was a disgruntled former employee who had made a complaint after being told she was about to be sacked.

“We gave her notice that we intended to terminate her employment while still under probation at about the 10th month of her probation,” Mr Fleming said. “She immediately made what she considered to be a protected communication to me, she then complained as she is entitled to do to the Inspector.” The Estimates Committee subsequently allowed the whistleblower’s barrister, John Lawrence SC, to give evidence in response to Mr Fleming. During his appearance on June 24, Mr Lawrence tabled documents he said proved Mr Fleming hadn’t informed his client her employment would be terminated until after she made the complaint, and that Mr Fleming had confirmed she was a protected whistleblower before she was sacked.

He produced a letter signed by Mr Fleming that shows the whistleblower made her complaint on March 17.

On March 29 Mr Fleming wrote back to her confirming the matter was being investigated and that she was now a protected whistleblower.

“Your report is a ‘protected communication’ and you are a ‘protected person’,” Mr Fleming wrote. Another letter tabled by Mr Lawrence showed Mr Fleming wrote to her on April 13 to say her employment would be terminated.