The speed of cultural change at Parliament House has been called into question as bureaucrats defend the slow pace of the rollout of resources to help staff deal with serious incidents.
Officials from the Department of Parliamentary Services told a senate estimates hearing on Monday that an 11-minute training video, which was released last October in the wake of Brittany Higgins’ assault allegations, had now been viewed by all security staff not on leave.
Asked why the video had not been made available to all parliamentary staff, DPS secretary Rob Stefanic said the training was designed for security as first responders.
“It's not intended for general consumption because it is an instruction delivered by one of our safety and security training officers to the security officers themselves,” he said.
However, officials insisted other training resources had been mandated for DPS staff.
Labor’s Katy Gallagher also probed the bureaucrats about what had changed since Ms Higgins went public with her alleged rape in a minister’s office.
“Do you think the situation has changed to the point that what allegedly occurred to Miss Higgins in this building would be unlikely, or not happen again, with the changes that have been put in place?” the senator asked.
“Certainly,” Mr Stefanic replied.
“I certainly think (Ms Higgins) is at the forefront of the mind of all our staff, whether they’re security staff or not.”
But Senator Gallagher pressed on: “Have we done enough to make Parliament House as safe as it can be for people in this building?”
Senate president Slade Brockman said it was an “ongoing body of work.”
“The reality is that it is not going to be done overnight,” he said.
“This is a long process we are undertaking. That's just the reality of the situation when you’re undertaking such a significant body of work. It can never happen instantly.”
Asked if security staff would now feel empowered to step in if the situation called for it, Mr Stefanic said it wasn’t the role of security staff to make judgment on authorised pass holders entering the building – and pushed back on MPs to hurry up and define entry requirements.
“That’s why it’s important for the parliament to decide what the entry requirements are – what restrictions will be imposed on someone presenting to the building in a state that might not be acceptable in the workplace,” he said.
But if an event were to occur that fits the definition of a serious incident, officials said security staff would contact the AFP.
