4 In that Statement, the Commission made the following observations:
At the commencement of the conciliation process, the Department made a submission which identified possible savings from the Court Escort Security Unit ('CESU') budget sufficient (in fact, more than sufficient) to meet the earlier mentioned savings objectives of the Government. That submission documented, in some detail, the nature of the changes proposed by the Department and was supplemented by comprehensive factual material as to the operation of the CESU. As the conference progressed, representatives of the PSA assisted the process by also identifying possible areas of savings. In the result, the parties have focussed their attention, during the conciliation proceedings, upon the merits of the proposed savings initiatives and costings for the same.
In my view, parties have, to date, constructively approached the task presented them in the conciliation proceedings and have engaged in the utmost good faith bargaining. They have fully co-operated with each other and with the Commission in its efforts to assist them in reaching a suitable outcome to the subject matter of the dispute. This much is illustrated by the fact that, in the first two month interval since the conciliation process commenced on 26 May, the parties have identified savings of about $2 million. Those savings concerned the utilisation of casual correctional officers within the court escort and transport function of the Department. They consisted of tangible, recurrent savings in the CESU's budget.
There is an agreed programme for the consideration of a further, specified set of cost savings in the next two month interval after the issuing of this Statement which, if realised, would either wholly or substantially meet the savings objectives for the prisoner escort and court security functions of the Department well in advance of the six month limitation period. All of this does seem to confirm the wisdom of the Minister's approach in this particular case.
It is not possible to provide any more detail in this Statement as to the progress of the matter for two reasons. Firstly, that step would be inappropriate in conciliation proceedings. Secondly, the issuing of more information in that manner would undermine the confidentiality arrangements presently applying to the conciliation process. Whilst the parties will have an opportunity in due course to consult with persons affected by the savings and other relevant stakeholders and interests, the parties are bound to strict confidentiality arrangements during the course of the conciliation proceedings.
Those same considerations constrain the capacity to immediately implement the savings deriving from the casual utilisation process, as the parties have not, as yet, had the opportunity to consult with persons affected by any proposed change. It is the intention of the Commission, however, to examine whether those confidentiality conditions might be lifted during the next two month interval so that there may be consultation with those interests and, if appropriate, an interim implementation of the then agreed savings measures.
The Commission intends to issue a further Statement in relation to this matter at the conclusion of a further two month interval in the Conciliation proceedings which are due to recommence on 4 August 2009.
5 The conciliation proceedings recommenced slightly later than scheduled in order to enable the parties to appropriately prepare for the second stage of the proceedings. The conciliation conferences resumed on 13 August and continued on 14 and 25 August respectively.
6 On 9 September, the Commission received a document from Mr S Turner, Assistant General Secretary of the PSA, which communicated the agreed position of the parties arising out of the first and second stages of the conciliation process. That agreement will result in changes in three aspects of the operation of CESU: the utilisation of casual correctional officers within the court escort and transport function of the Department, arrangements for Temporary Court Security Officers and the hours of operation of 24 hour court locations. The savings deriving from those changes were fully costed and substantial.