Written audit findings used by the chief of navy, Vice-Admiral Tim Barrett, to defend a naval base’s handling of allegations of sexual assault and misconduct, did not exist at the time he referred to them.
In September Guardian Australia revealed that senior military and defence officials suppressed allegations of serious misconduct and inappropriate sexual behaviour by naval officer trainees at HMAS Creswell.
The allegations surround a trainee who was court-martialled on charges he got into bed with another trainee while she was asleep. A defence inquiry investigated other serious allegations at the base, and trainees and officers gave evidence of several concerns arising from their experiences there.
After Guardian Australia’s investigation, Barrett defended the culture and behaviour at HMAS Creswell, relying in part on what he described as a “routine audit” in September by the inspector general of defence.
But the defence department has conceded the audit report had not been finalised at the time Barrett referred to it, and that no draft had been completed. Barrett’s response appears to have been based on a secondhand “verbal briefing” – the audit team spoke to HMAS Creswell’s commanding officer, who then passed on details to Barrett.
In response to a freedom of information request for the audit, the inspector-general of the defence force, Colonel JM Quirk, said staff had inspected his office on the day Guardian Australia raised questions about the allegations.
But no report had been finalised from the inspection. A spokeswoman for the defence department said the chief of navy stood by his initial comments.
The response to the freedom of information request said: “Consistent with standard practice, IGADF [inspector general of the Australian Defence Force] aims to deliver a completed audit report within 4-6 weeks of the conclusion of an audit. Accordingly, the report of the audit of HMAS Creswell has not yet been completed, nor was it in draft form at the time of your FOI request.”
Barrett’s initial statement had said: “This month, HMAS Creswell has also undergone a routine audit by the Inspector General of the Australian Defence Force. This audit found no evidence of any breach of military justice or failure to address unacceptable behaviour.”
The letter did not explain how he came to make the claims about the audit.
The FOI decision said: “Colonel Quirk spoke with relevant IGADF personnel to seek clarification of the above statement. Colonel Quirk was advised that the Commanding Officer Creswell was provided a verbal exit brief by the IGADF audit team on 23 September 2015. The content of that verbal brief may have informed the Chief of Navy’s ‘On the Record’ comment.”
The Australian defence force’s response to abuse and serious allegations has come under fire over a series of scandals.
When Guardian Australia asked whether the navy chief attempted to mislead the public in his representations in the statement, a defence spokeswoman said the navy chief “stands by the facts presented in his on-the-record statement”.
She said: “It is standard practice on completion of these audits for the external audit team to provide a verbal brief to the commanding officer in order to report on key audit results and identify issues of concern that may require urgent attention within their command – ahead of a more formal written report being produced.”
The spokeswoman said Barrett had been briefed by the commanding officer of HMAS Creswell about the contents of the verbal briefing “and reported the facts presented in the on-the-record statement”.
She also denied that the audit – which commenced on 22 September – had been commissioned after Guardian Australia’s query to defence about the allegations surrounding HMAS Creswell.
“IGADF has a rolling audit schedule that covers all relevant organisations within the ADF,” she said. “This schedule is developed independently of the services and was not linked to the Guardian Australia’s article.
“IGADF made initial planning contact with HMAS Creswell regarding this audit approximately six months prior to the audit being conducted and the audit commenced on 21 September 2015.”
