State ‘changed rules’ for Fong’s pay deal15th

August 2006, 9:15 WST
The public service watchdog has detailed how the State Government quietly watered down a crucial WA Inc-inspired regulation so Neale Fong could keep his exorbitant salary when he became Health Department director-general.

In a discussion paper to be released today, Maxine Murray, the Public Sector Standards Commissioner, warns that the action was against the spirit of WA Inc royal commission recommendations and placed the integrity of senior public service appointments at risk. Dr Fong was made acting director-general of the Health Department in November 2004 but had to wait until October 2005 before he became the “substantive occupant” of the job.

According to Ms Murray, that was because the initial $538,000 pay packet he brought with him from his job as head of the North Metropolitan Health Service was outside the range available to the Government for a Health Department boss. Dr Fong was appointed to the NMHS ostensibly to oversee the implementation of the Government’s Reid report into the WA health system. Under the Act governing the service, his salary was at the discretion of Health Minister Jim McGinty.

But not long after joining the NMHS, the then Health Department chief Mike Daube resigned and Dr Fong became acting director-general. At that stage, the Government removed the position from the jurisdiction of the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal where the top level for a director-general of health was $288,000 a year.

But even then a troublesome formula contained in Public Sector Management Act regulations meant Dr Fong could only be paid the sort of money other health bosses around the country were getting, and that was a long way short of $538,000.

The Government amended the regulations in September last year to do away with the formula and put payment of non-SAT chief executives at its own discretion. Dr Fong’s annual pay has since risen to more than $634,000.

The amendments were not debated and passed through State Parliament largely unnoticed but have since become known in Government circles as the “Fong amendments”. Ms Murray only became aware of them when they were published in the Government Gazette.

She was at pains yesterday to point out that Dr Fong was well-qualified to get the job but said the process by which he was appointed “creates a serious risk to the integrity of the senior appointments process for the public sector”. “If it were used to appoint friends, party political colleagues or those who do not possess the necessary skills or qualifications, as the WA Inc royal commission identified had occurred, this would exacerbate the problem,” she said.

Mr McGinty said last night: “Dr Neale Fong was appointed director-general of Health because he is highly qualified, suitable for the role and the best person to implement the biggest reform of the health system in the State’s history.”

Ms Murray also raises concerns in her paper about the way former environment minister Judy Edwards was apparently able to sidestep regulations governing the appointment of a chief executive by keeping former Department of Environment boss Derek Carew-Hopkins in an acting role for three years.
Robert Taylor, State Politics Editor, EXCLUSIVE