Under my questioning, Rob Stefanic, the head of the federal government department tasked with overseeing Parliament House, denied being in a relationship with his deputy, but refused to say whether he’d been in one with her before creating and placing her in a job paying about $430,000 a year. Cate Saunders was also given a $315,000 additional payment to retire, despite being far younger than the retirement age.
Listen to my questioning and tell me whether you believe Rob Stefanic’s answers are worth the $478,000 he is paid by YOU, the Australian taxpayer, as I had to remind him. I also asked about reports of there being a toxic culture at his agency, the Department of Parliamentary Services. Multiple staff have approached me and I am not satisfied with the fobbing off of these concerns.
If you’ve been a staffer in the Department of Parliamentary Services and have a complaint, please contact me confidentially at senator.roberts@aph.gov.au
Anyone taking 1/2 an hour to answer a simple question, doesn’t take a lie detector test to sus it out!
Senator Robert’s has done the very most to expose corruption and fight for the people, a couple of others come second to him! Next election CANNOT come quick enough, get Albo and cronies OUT while we still have a country left!
Wish the pensioners were getting half of that salary even a 1/4. Be 🙂
We talk about corruption in third world countries, we have it here too.
Well done Malcolm to try and sort these A******S out
Australia will be a better place without ABOSLEAZY
Well done Mr. Roberts, again you have put the pressure on, thank you!! How dare he think he is above answering the questions he is playing with PUBLIC money! Clearly he forgets who he works for and clearly demonstrates that he is apparently above questioning. Shocking and disgraceful! Is it any wonder here is so little faith in this government of fools. One Nation needs to take the reins and sort this bloody country out. You are just the man for the job Mr. Roberts, you will always have my vote!
I agree with Mr Stefanic regarding privacy. It must be hard to answer such about private issues. These types of questions should not be needed to be asked in the first place.
If it does in fact turn out that these questions do need to be asked, then they should be asked and answered in the appropriate environment and not public. If these questions are not asked and answered in full and with truthful disclosure in the appropriate environment, then there is no better place that I know of other than in a Senate enquiry environment and Mr Stefanic should answer in full and with full disclosure. This environment would be MUCH better than a newspaper or similar. Considering the questions have been asked in this environment then I guess there was not full disclosure in the other environments.
Due to the Senate enquiry and these questions needing to be asked, it would appear that Mr Stefanic has not given full disclosure. In this case he should answer yes or no to these basic and simple quests. He answered no to the question regarding the time during Ms Saunder’s employment and it was painless and closes the door on this period of time. Mr Stefanic’s refusal to answer regarding before or after is an insult to the Citizens that pay his salary, and it appears that Mr Stefanic doesn’t want to answer because there was some relationship. He has kept this door wide open and wedged it open.
What is so unbelievable is that Mr Stefanic, on some $450,000, one day just decides that his workload is so great that HE thinks the taxpayer should pay for a duplicate type of role to help him out. He then CREATES a role out of thin air (was there a budget??) and THEN not long after the role is considered not required so his new appointed help is not needed. He should answer the question without delay. Just under $450,000 and he stuffs up costing some $750,000 and won’t answer because of his privacy. Give me a break and sack him now and get the money back.
It also appears that this could be true, “In November 2021, the government released a report into parliamentary workplaces which found the Department of Parliamentary Services was “particularly driven by fear”. Cover ups everywhere.
Then add the 2021 Higgins & Lehrmann situate that was reported to have happened inside a minister’s office.
Some ten + years ago while work in a government job for nearly 40 years without a complaint. I was eventually sacked because I failed to do the roles of THREE (3) people. The other 2 retires or moved on and the workload was dumped on to me and there was no money in the budget to pay for replacement staff. I was sacked because I collapsed under the stress and continued pressure of some years so they said I could do my job. I was eventually replaced by 2 or 3 staff members, who were on a higher paid role,