Ms ROSOL – Minister, the government’s announced that they’re going to be doing internal reviews of GBEs with an eye to exploring privatisation possibilities. Just a question around whether you’ve been considering the privatisation of PAHSMA. Have there been any previous reports into this at all and what’s your position on privatisation in relation to PAHSMA?
Ms OGILVIE – Not considering privatisation.
Ms ROSOL – Have there been any reports in the past about it with recommendations?
Ms OGILVIE – Not in my time.
Ms ROSOL – Okay. The annual report states that there’s been a significant focus on culture over the past year. That was following on from the Tasmanian State Service (TSS) employee survey that showed that 44 per cent of staff had reported exposure to bullying in the previous 12 months. I’m wondering if you’re able to provide any further information about the bullying. Did the survey have any more data around whether the bullying was from colleagues at a similar level or whether it was coming from management? Was that part of the survey? Are you able to expand on some of that?
Mr O’BRIEN – That doesn’t come out in the survey itself so much. The survey is one of our, I guess, feeds in terms of information on where the culture and our people are at. We also run pulse surveys and have done for the last four or five years that supplement the TSS which occurs generally once a year.
I think it was 43 per cent of people, it was 44 per cent the previous survey. What that resulted in when we bring in the real data as to what was reported, I think there were eight reported in that sort of area, three which related to bullying, and they were coworker to coworker. We triangulate the data to properly understand where we’re at and there is a range of things we’ve got in place and have had in place for quite a while.
This is something the board have been looking at since 2019. We got in some specialist assistance to help us look at the TSS survey and other aspects of our workforce. If you look back through the TSS, you see that post that 2018 survey we got a significant jump and improvement in our scores, then COVID hit and the site was shut for a period of time. Then we’ve had three or four years, I think it was 50 per cent, 40 per cent reductions in visitation, so the site was effectively fractured with people not being able to work as they did before.
The following survey, the 2020 survey, showed more or less a return to where we were in 2018. We’ve been rebuilding the processes that we adopted first back then, and I’m talking about it because it’s something that the board really obviously have overview of and interest in.
Ms ROSOL – Has the 2024 TSS survey happened?
Mr O’BRIEN – Yes.
Ms ROSOL – I’m assuming that will be reported in the next annual report, but has there been any indication of any changes in the –
Mr O’BRIEN – A slight improvement, and we’ve done since then, we’ve done a range of face-to-face interviews with staff to further unpick the path that we’re on. The general feedback from that is showing areas of improvement as well.
Ms ROSOL – On page 27 of the annual report, it lists $94,105 in payment for services relating to a culture program provided by Steople. On page 14 of the report, it talks about a deep dive analysis of one-on-one staff interviews, which you were mentioning just before. I have some questions about the services provided by Steople Have they provided a written report of the results of their analysis of the surveys, the interviews, the pulse surveys?
Mr FLAMSTEED – Yes, there is. There’s a culture strategy and roadmap that outlines steps and programs that we can take, that we’ve committed to take over the next life of the strategy. A couple of things to note. The cultural roadmap and strategy is very much an evolving document. It has a clear direction for the next year or two, and we’ll continue to review that as we move forward.
A couple of interesting projects that we’ve already undertaken: Grant mentioned before about the level of face-to-face interviews that we’ve done. We’ve also run a number of leader‑led workshops to understand how our organisation is performing and where it’s at. One of the early recommendations of the cultural road map was to have a staff‑led review of the values of our organisation. It is really interesting to have gone into that with our staff leading, where they engage with their peers to understand culturally how we could evolve within the organisation. They’ve created a set of values that we are now rolling out into the organisation. Part of that was also to include, to support our staff going through that, a number of values leads or values champions, we call them, that enabled our staff to have that level of support, to have those discussions and conversations with their peers.
Ms ROSOL – Thank you. Is that Steople report something that could be tabled here?
Mr O’BRIEN – I would think so.
Mr FLAMSTEED – It is an internal report.
Ms ROSOL – So, does that mean it can’t be? Sorry, I wasn’t sure what the answer was.
Mr O’BRIEN – I’m not sure where we start and we stop with that.
Ms ROSOL – Are there any other consultants that have been contracted to provide services for culture change or organisational development outside of Steople? I know you have Belrose Group for HR services.
Mr O’BRIEN – Correct.
Ms ROSOL – There’s also seven people providing a culture program. Are there any other consultants providing services in this area?
Mr O’BRIEN – Not currently, no.
Unknown – [inaudible]
Ms ROSOL – Sorry, was that seven?
CHAIR – Sorry, if you’re going to contribute, you need to come to the table.
Ms ROSOL – It sounds like he knows quite a bit, so maybe he should come to the table.
Mr FLAMSTEED – We use a number of contractors. We do use contractors. We are an agency, an organisation that is on the Tasman Peninsula that does struggle finding key personnel for those roles because of our geographical distance and because of the specialist nature of some of those roles. In areas like project management, we do use contractors to enable us to get the jobs that we have outlined in our strategic plan, which is a series of projects that focuses on us as an organisation getting to financial sustainability in five years. So, yes, we do use other contractors specifically in areas of project management.
We’ve got a contractor that is managing part of the Steople project. They have been working with our organisation in other different areas of project management. Specifically, from a culture perspective, they are managing a project, they are not a culture specialist. That is why I answered that question –
Ms OGILVIE – I could probably contribute a little bit too, if it’s helpful, in relation to consultancies. Overarchingly, funds spent on consultants during the 2023-24 totalled $756,852, which was up from $668,331 in the previous year with the major contributor to the increase relating to the engagement of New South Wales Public Works to provide highly specialised advice on the penitentiary stabilisation, which I am sure we will come to at some point.
Ms ROSOL – I asked about the tabling of the report from Steople and that is not possible. However, you mentioned that there is a plan being developed. Is that something that could be? Is it part of the strategic plan? It’s not like a separate plan?
Mr FLAMSTEED – No, it’s just our strategic plan, the 2023-28 strategic plan.
Ms ROSOL – It includes it in it? I didn’t notice. I’ve got it.
Mr FLAMSTEED – I am happy to table it. I’ve got a copy.
Ms ROSOL – I have a copy, thanks.
Mr FLAMSTEED – Fantastic. It is a wonderful document.
Ms ROSOL – Just a question about the staff. In the report you have that there are 130 permanent staff, 13 fixed‑term staff. How does that work for them in terms of hours? Are they given guaranteed hours or is there some movement in the hours they get? I understand they’re permanent, but how do their hours work out in terms of consistency?
Mr FLAMSTEED – In the way of permanent staff?
Ms ROSOL – Yes, and maybe the fixed‑term as well. They’re on a contract. Is it contracted hours or is it contracted employment with movement in the hours?
Mr FLAMSTEED – Depending on the contract, it’s generally contracted as in time, but within that contract, there’d be a recognition of percentage of hours, so it might be 0.3 or 0.6, they’re generally consistent in those hours, generally, depending on the nature of the of the contract.
We have a really interesting workplace. We have seasonal fluctuation. It’s really interesting to, I suppose, analyse that and understand how we can ensure that we remain financially sustainable as an organisation.
We have 65 per cent permanent staff. Twentynine of those, we call them more-casual ‑ 29 casual. They fluctuate seasonally, so we’ve just had a big influx for our summer period. Those fixed‑term – sorry, those permanent staff – generally do have set hours.
Ms ROSOL – And that doesn’t change seasonally for them? They have their ‑
Mr FLAMSTEED – They’re employed annually.
Ms ROSOL – Yes. Thank you. We’ve already mentioned the water and sewage infrastructure works that are needed at the site. My understanding is that that will increase the capacity for visitor numbers once that’s been put in place. I’m wondering if there’s been any modelling or assessment conducted around that increase in visitor numbers and the effect that will have on the rest of the site. If you have more people coming in because the sewerage and water treatment can facilitate them, those increased numbers will then have an impact across the site. Has there been any modelling and exploration done around the impact of more people coming?
Ms OGILVIE – Potentially, just before you start, can I perhaps suggest also ‑
CHAIR – Ms Ogilvie, you just need to speak into the microphone for Hansard.
Ms OGILVIE – Sorry. Can I also recommend that you talk a little bit about the legacy issues with the water and sewerage and why we’re doing that work, and then also then also the projection of the numbers.
Ms ROSOL – I think everyone’s in agreement that the work is needed and necessary. It’s more about the impact of doing it.
Mr FLAMSTEED – What the minister was referring to, to give a bit of background, a few years ago, TasWater did a report to understand, I suppose, the quality of asset and the ability of the asset that we had for water and sewerage on site. We then had that independently appraised as well through pitt&sherry to make us understand what we needed to do to ensure that we would have a steady stream of water, not a steady stream of sewage, and a capable sewerage system as well. We recognise that value. We were very happy to receive funding from the Tasmanian government of $16 million to ensure that we get our water and sewerage to a stage that would be able for a specialist government business like TasWater to actually take over.
The impact that it would have on site, again, we’re limited by our ability with visitation to what comes into the state of Tasmania. We’re the fourth largest visited site the state, which is fantastic. There is room for opportunity there, there is no doubt about that. What we need to consider is how we best manage those people in the site. As compared to having thousands more people coming out in peak season, what does it look like if we have a high demand in winter? A lot of the projects that we are focusing on moving forward as to how we manage our visitation is understanding what it looks like in the low season. We’re supporting and investing in local community events like the Lightwave Festival on the Tasman Peninsula that enables us to grow winter visitation and allow us to steady that visitation across the site.
Ms ROSOL – I understand that just because there’s sewage and water capacity increases, it doesn’t mean that suddenly thousands more people are coming and going, ‘Woohoo, that’s great!’. It depends on other factors. Are you saying that you are looking at the capacity of the site, and I am not just talking about getting more people in, but what impact it might have on the site in terms of the buildings, light issues or that kind of thing at night?
Mr FLAMSTEED – It’s a great question. We have an annual conservation maintenance program and built into that are specific ways that we manage as specialists in managing World Heritage sites and we manage those assets. To me, that’s quite separate to the visitation piece. How we manage our visitors in that way is how we interpret our site and we can actually manage that quite effectively. How we analyse that is on an annual basis with our corporate planning, so we can make decisions for a five-year projection that enables us to account for how we will do that.
Mr O’BRIEN – Before Will’s time and before COVID, we undertook or started a carrying capacity, which looks exactly like what you’re talking about, what the impact of visitor numbers is at various places around the site. That got dropped with COVID because carrying capacity wasn’t an issue. It’s something that we’ll need to pick up in the future.
Mr FLAMSTEED – It features in our heritage management plan.
Ms ROSOL – PAHSMA has a community advisory committee to engage with stakeholders and guide its work. Are there any Tasmanian Aboriginals on that committee? You’ve talked about how there’s not enough consultation at the moment. Are there any Tasmanian Aboriginals on the committee who are able to contribute at the moment?
Mr FLAMSTEED – We have two community advisory committees, one is for the Cascades Female Factory. There are no identified Tasmanians Aboriginals in either of those committees.
CHAIR – The time being 9.45 a.m. the time for scrutiny has expired.
