Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010

In ForceQLD

Jurisdiction

Queensland

Act Number

38 of 2010

Collection

act

Plain English Summary

6/10 complexity

What this law does, who it affects, and how it works

Purpose: The Act sets out a framework for people to disclose (report) wrongdoing in the public sector, and for authorities to handle, investigate and protect people who make those disclosures (see sec.3). It defines who counts as a public sector entity, who can be a proper authority, and what kinds of information may be disclosed (see secs.5–6, 11–13).
Who can make disclosures and what may be disclosed: Any person may disclose certain dangers to people with disability, specified environmental risks, or possible reprisals (sec.12). Public officers (employees, members or officers of public sector entities) may disclose a wider range of matters including corrupt conduct, maladministration with substantial adverse effect, misuse of public resources, and serious dangers to public health, safety or the environment (sec.13). The Act treats information given and assistance supplied with a disclosure as part of the disclosure (sec.11).
To whom disclosures may be made: A disclosure can be made to a “proper authority” — a public sector entity or a member of the Legislative Assembly — depending on the subject matter and connection to the receiving entity (secs.5, 14–16, 15). There are special rules for disclosures about judicial officers (sec.16), for corporate-style government entities and rail government entities (sec.19), and for disclosures made in court proceedings (sec.23). Disclosures can be anonymous and may be made in any way, but persons must use a proper authority’s reasonable procedure if one exists (sec.17).

JSON API

Deep Dive

4,918 words · generated 12/05/2026

What it does

The Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010 (the Act) establishes a statutory framework for facilitating disclosures of wrongdoing in the Queensland public sector while protecting those who make them. Section 3 sets out four main objects: to promote the public interest by facilitating public interest disclosures of wrongdoing in the public sector; to ensure that those disclosures are properly assessed and, when appropriate, properly investigated and dealt with; to ensure that appropriate consideration is given to the interests of persons who are the subject of a public interest disclosure; and to afford protection from reprisals to persons making public interest disclosures. The Act creates a scheme under which any person (whether or not a public officer) may disclose certain types of information to a proper authority, and public officers may disclose additional categories of information. Part 2 of chapter 2 defines what constitutes a public interest disclosure, who may make one, to whom it may be made, and the manner in which it must be made. There are specific provisions for disclosures concerning government-owned corporations (GOCs) and rail government entities in part 3 of chapter 2, and a new mechanism in part 4 allowing disclosures to journalists in limited circumstances after the original recipient has failed to act within six months. Chapter 3 imposes obligations on public sector entities and members of the Legislative Assembly to which disclosures are made, including duties to establish reasonable procedures, keep records, and refer disclosures appropriately. Chapter 4 provides comprehensive protection for disclosers: immunity from civil and criminal liability (section 36), override of confidentiality provisions (section 37), a defence of absolute privilege in defamation proceedings (section 38), and a tort of reprisal with damages (section 42). The Act also creates a criminal offence of taking a reprisal punishable by up to two years imprisonment (section 41). Injunctive relief is available through the industrial commission or the Supreme Court (sections 48 and 49). The Act replaces the Whistleblowers Protection Act 1994, and transitional provisions in chapter 8 ensure that disclosures made under the repealed Act are taken to be disclosures under the new Act from the commencement (section 74).

Current sections

Direct links to the current provisions in Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010.

Official source available

Zoe has indexed the source text for search and analysis. Use the official register for the original document and download formats.

View on official register

Sourced from Queensland Legislation (legislation.qld.gov.au), CC BY 4.0.

Who pays and who decides: Public sector entities bear the implementation and compliance costs — they must create and publish procedures (sec.28), keep records (sec.29), notify disclosers in writing (sec.32), and may face civil liability (sec.43) and damages claims (sec.42) if reprisals occur. Courts and the Industrial Commission decide on injunctions and damages (secs.48–56, 42). The oversight agency can set standards that create additional reporting and process requirements (sec.33).
Compliance burden and administrative discretion: Chief executives must design and publish reasonable procedures (sec.28) and keep prescribed records (sec.29). Public sector entities have specific statutory discretion not to investigate on enumerated grounds (e.g. triviality, duplication, age of information) but must give written reasons and allow review (sec.30). Entities exercising referral powers must assess reprisal risk and consult the discloser where practicable (sec.31) — these are concrete discretion points that require judgment.
Incentives and behaviour change: The Act provides strong legal protections for disclosers (secs.36–38) and clear penalties for reprisals (secs.40–41, 42). That structure creates legal incentives for individuals to disclose and for entities to avoid reprisals (secs.36–43). Managers retain the ability to carry out reasonable management actions, but only where those actions are not taken because the person made a disclosure (sec.45) — this preserves managerial control while constraining retaliatory grounds.
Effects on private enterprise and entities outside the public sector: The Act’s primary reach is public sector entities (sec.6). Corporate entities are generally excluded unless expressly included by the Act (sec.6). Employees of government-owned corporations and rail government entities have specific disclosure routes and protections (sec.19), and the Act explicitly declares certain state provisions to displace Corporations Act provisions in that limited context (sec.19). Entities that receive public funds or are established for government purposes may be caught (sec.6), so some non-profit or private contractors funded by government could face obligations depending on how the Act and regulations apply.
Enforcement, costs and risks: Enforcement combines criminal penalties (sec.41), civil liability for damages (sec.42) and remedies including injunctions (secs.48–56). These multiple enforcement pathways create both deterrence and potential litigation costs for public sector entities and individuals. Vicarious liability (sec.43) and statutory recordkeeping and reporting standards (secs.29, 33) concentrate operational costs at the organisational level.
Implementation risks and trade-offs: The Act delegates significant procedural and evaluative tasks to chief executives and oversight standards (secs.28, 33). That centralisation of procedural design creates an implementation risk: inconsistent or inadequate procedures across entities could affect whether protections and investigatory functions operate as intended. The Act also balances protections for disclosers against managers’ ability to carry out ordinary employment actions (sec.45), which requires entities to document and justify legitimate management decisions to avoid liability.

Main concepts

Several key concepts define the scope and operation of the Act. A "public interest disclosure" is defined in section 11 as a disclosure under chapter 2, and includes all information and help given by the discloser to a proper authority for the disclosure. The Act distinguishes between disclosures that any person may make and those that only a public officer may make. For any person, section 12 applies if the person has information about: a substantial and specific danger to the health or safety of a person with a disability; the commission of an offence against a provision mentioned in schedule 2 (if that offence is or would be a substantial and specific danger to the environment); a contravention of a condition imposed under a provision mentioned in schedule 2 (with the same environmental danger requirement); or conduct that could, if proved, be a reprisal. For a public officer, section 13 adds additional categories: corrupt conduct (which for a commission officer is treated as if the Crime and Corruption Commission were a unit of public administration under section 13(4)); maladministration that adversely affects a person's interests in a substantial and specific way; a substantial misuse of public resources (excluding mere policy disagreement); a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety; and a substantial and specific danger to the environment.

A "proper authority" is defined in section 5 as either a public sector entity or a member of the Legislative Assembly. Section 6 defines "public sector entity" broadly to include committees of the Legislative Assembly, the parliamentary service, courts and tribunals, administrative offices attached to courts or tribunals, the Executive Council, departments (including the Queensland Ambulance Service, Queensland Fire and Rescue Service, and Queensland Police Service), local governments, registered higher education providers and TAFE Queensland, entities established under an Act for a public purpose, and entities prescribed by regulation that are assisted by public funds. However, certain entities are expressly excluded from being public sector entities: corporate entities (except to the extent expressly stated), GOCs (except to the extent expressly stated), and specified entities under the Education (General Provisions) Act 2006 (advisory committees, non-State schools, and parents and citizens associations). A "public officer" of a public sector entity is defined in section 7 as an employee, member or officer of the entity, and includes the Minister responsible for a department, members of school councils, and Ministerial staff members. The "chief executive officer" of a public sector entity is defined in section 8 and includes persons listed in schedule 1; a regulation may prescribe a person to be treated as chief executive officer for particular disclosures. "Reprisal" is defined in section 40 as causing, attempting or conspiring to cause detriment to another person because the person or someone else has made or intends to make a public interest disclosure, or because they are or intend to be involved in a proceeding under the Act. Detriment is not defined in the provided text but is central to the tort and offence provisions.

Who it affects

The Act affects a broad range of persons and entities. Any person, regardless of whether they are a public officer, may make a public interest disclosure under section 12 if they have information about the specific dangers or reprisal conduct listed in that section. Public officers are additionally entitled to disclose the broader categories in section 13, including corrupt conduct, maladministration, and substantial misuse of public resources. Employees of GOCs and rail government entities are covered by section 19, which allows them to disclose corrupt conduct of other employees or reprisal conduct to the GOC, the rail government entity, or the Crime and Corruption Commission. Persons who have made an initial disclosure and received no substantive action within six months may make a further disclosure to a journalist under section 20. Journalists themselves are not "relevant persons" for the purposes of the confidentiality obligations in section 64 and do not gain information because of involvement in the Act's administration for the purposes of section 65.

The Act imposes obligations on "proper authorities" which include public sector entities and members of the Legislative Assembly. All public sector entities as defined in section 6 are affected, including departments, local governments, courts and tribunals, and universities. Their chief executive officers must establish reasonable procedures under section 28 to support disclosers, properly assess and investigate disclosures, take appropriate action on wrongdoing, develop management programs consistent with any standard made under section 60, and offer protection from reprisals. GOCs are included in the chapter 3 definition of "public sector entity" (section 26), so they are subject to the same procedural obligations when they receive disclosures. Members of the Legislative Assembly to whom disclosures are made under section 14 are affected by sections 34 and 35: they may refer disclosures to appropriate entities but have no investigative role. The Act also affects any person who might take a reprisal , the prohibition in section 40 applies to all persons, not just public officers or employees. Public sector entities are vicariously liable under section 43 for reprisals committed by their employees in the course of employment, unless they can prove they took reasonable steps to prevent the contravention. The industrial commission and the Supreme Court may be called upon to grant injunctions in relation to reprisals. The Crime and Corruption Commission is frequently referenced, including as a possible recipient of disclosures about judicial officers (section 16) and as a potential applicant for injunctions (sections 48, 49, 56).

Key duties and rights

The Act creates a web of duties on public sector entities and their chief executive officers, and corresponding rights for disclosers. The primary duty is in section 28: the chief executive officer of a public sector entity must establish reasonable procedures to ensure that public officers who make disclosures are given appropriate support; that disclosures are properly assessed and when appropriate investigated and dealt with; that appropriate action is taken on any wrongdoing; that a management program is developed and implemented consistent with any standard made under section 60; and that public officers are offered protection from reprisals. These procedures must be published on the entity's website as soon as practicable. Section 29 imposes a record-keeping duty: the chief executive officer must keep a proper record of any disclosure (or purported disclosure) made or referred to the entity, including the name of the discloser if known, the information disclosed, any action taken, and any other information required under a standard. This duty does not apply to courts, tribunals, or the Executive Council (section 29(3)). Section 32 imposes an obligation to give the discloser (or the referring entity) reasonable information in writing about the disclosure, at a minimum including confirmation of receipt, a description of proposed or taken action, and results of action if any. However, this information need not be given if it would be likely to adversely affect anybody's safety, the investigation of an offence, or necessary confidentiality about an informant (section 32(4)).

For disclosers, the Act confers extensive rights and protections. Section 36 provides that a person who makes a public interest disclosure is not subject to any civil or criminal liability, or any liability arising by way of administrative process including disciplinary action, for making the disclosure. Section 37 states that the discloser does not commit an offence under any Act imposing confidentiality duties, and does not breach any obligation by way of oath, rule of law or practice, or agreement requiring confidentiality. Section 38 gives the discloser a defence of absolute privilege in defamation proceedings for publishing the information disclosed. However, section 39 makes clear that liability for the person's own conduct is not affected by the disclosure , so a person who confesses to wrongdoing still faces consequences for that wrongdoing. Section 45 provides that reasonable management action is not prevented by the protection provisions, but only if the manager's reasons do not include the fact that the person has made a disclosure. Section 46 gives public officers a right to appeal or seek review of disciplinary action, appointment or transfer decisions, or unfair treatment on the ground that the action was a reprisal, even if the relevant Act does not specify that ground. Section 47 gives public service employees a right to apply for relocation to the industrial relations commission if it is likely a reprisal will be taken and relocation is the only practical way to remove the danger. The commission may direct relocation within the department or to another department, but only with the employee's agreement and the other department's chief executive if applicable.

Penalties and enforcement

The Act creates a comprehensive enforcement regime centred on the prohibition of reprisals. Section 40 prohibits any person from causing, attempting or conspiring to cause detriment to another person because, or in the belief that, the other person or someone else has made or intends to make a public interest disclosure, or is or intends to be involved in a proceeding under the Act. An attempt to cause detriment includes an attempt to induce a person to cause detriment (section 40(2)). For a contravention to occur, it is sufficient that the unlawful ground is a substantial ground for the act or omission, even if there is another ground (section 40(5)). Section 41 creates a criminal offence of taking a reprisal, with a maximum penalty of 167 penalty units or two years imprisonment. The offence is indictable. Separately, section 42 declares that a reprisal is a tort, making the person who takes it liable in damages to any person who suffers detriment as a result. Any remedy available for a tort, including exemplary damages, may be granted. If the claim goes to trial in the Supreme Court or District Court, it must be decided by a judge sitting without a jury (section 42(3)). Proceedings for damages may be brought even if no prosecution has been or can be brought under section 41 (section 42(5)). Importantly, the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 does not apply to proceedings for damages under section 42 (section 42(6)). Section 43 makes public sector entities (including GOCs) jointly and severally civilly liable for reprisals committed by their employees in the course of employment. The entity has a defence if it proves on the balance of probabilities that it took reasonable steps to prevent the employee contravening section 40.

Injunctive relief is available through two routes. Section 48 allows an application for an injunction about a reprisal to be made to the industrial commission if the reprisal has caused or may cause detriment to an employee and involves or may involve a breach of the Industrial Relations Act 2016 or an industrial instrument. The application may be made by the employee, an industrial organisation with the employee's consent, or the Crime and Corruption Commission (with the employee's consent, if the employee is a public officer and the reprisal involves a matter the commission may investigate). The jurisdiction of the industrial commission is exclusive of any other court or tribunal other than the Industrial Court (section 48(4)). Section 49 provides a fallback: a person who cannot apply under section 48 may apply to the Supreme Court. Section 50 prevents a person from applying for an injunction if they have made a complaint under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 about the same reprisal. Section 51 sets out the grounds for granting an injunction: satisfaction that the person has engaged, is engaging, or is proposing to engage in conduct amounting to a reprisal, attempting a reprisal, or various forms of involvement. Section 52 allows the court or commission to require stated action to remedy any detriment caused. Interim injunctions may be granted under section 54. The court may impose restrictions on publication or access to evidence under section 55. The Crime and Corruption Commission is not required to give an undertaking as to damages or costs when applying for an injunction (section 56). Additionally, a person may make a complaint about a reprisal under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (section 44), but cannot subsequently commence damages proceedings under section 42 if the complaint is accepted, and vice versa (section 44(3)).

How it interacts with other laws

Section 10 provides that the Act does not limit the protection given by another law to a person who makes a disclosure of any type, nor does it affect another remedy available to the person. However, if there is an inconsistency between the Act and another law that gives such protection, the other law prevails to the extent of the inconsistency. This saving provision ensures that existing protections under other statutes, such as the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 or the Public Sector Act 2022, are not diminished. Section 17(4) states that the Act does not affect a procedure required under another Act for disclosing the type of information being disclosed , so if another Act mandates a particular reporting channel, that procedure is preserved. Section 19(8) clarifies that the specific disclosure provisions for GOCs and rail government entities do not affect the making of a public interest disclosure by any person under section 12, nor the making of a complaint to the Crime and Corruption Commission under the Crime and Corruption Act 2001. Section 19(9) preserves the operation of referral provisions under section 31, allowing disclosures to move between GOCs and public sector entities. Section 19(10) expressly declares that section 19 is a Corporations legislation displacement provision for the purposes of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) section 5G, in relation to section 1317AE of that Act. This ensures that the state law overrides any inconsistent Commonwealth corporation law concerning whistleblower protections for GOC employees.

Section 35 provides that the Act does not limit the immunities, powers, privileges or rights of the Legislative Assembly or its members or committees in relation to a public interest disclosure made to a member. This preserves parliamentary privilege. Section 37 overrides confidentiality provisions in any other Act, as well as obligations by way of oath, rule of law or practice, or agreement. Section 38 provides a defence of absolute privilege in defamation proceedings, which would override the usual qualified privilege defences. Section 43(2) provides a reasonable steps defence for public sector entities sued for vicarious liability, which mirrors common law principles but is codified here. Section 44 allows complaints under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 for reprisals, and section 44(3) creates an election between that route and damages proceedings under section 42. Section 48(3) provides that the Industrial Relations Act 2016 section 473 applies to applications for injunctions, but the Public Interest Disclosure Act prevails if inconsistent. Section 48(4) gives the industrial commission exclusive jurisdiction for injunctions involving a breach of the Industrial Relations Act or an industrial instrument, excluding other courts except the Industrial Court. Section 42(6) expressly excludes the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 from applying to damages proceedings, meaning those proceedings are not subject to workers' compensation scheme restrictions. Section 23 provides that a disclosure made to a court or tribunal in a proceeding where the information is relevant and admissible is taken to be a public interest disclosure made to the court as a proper authority. Section 23(5) makes clear that this does not give a person a right to take a proceeding that they do not otherwise have.

Amendment history

The Act has been amended several times since its enactment. The provided text includes amendment notes at various sections. Section 6 (definition of public sector entity) was amended by Acts 2013 No. 27, 2014 No. 4, 2014 No. 25, 2014 No. 62, and 2020 No. 3. Section 7 (definition of public officer) was amended by 2012 No. 6. Section 13 (disclosure by a public officer) was amended by 2014 No. 21 (which replaced references to the Crime and Misconduct Commission with the Crime and Corruption Commission, and schedule 2 references) and by 2024 No. 41 (which added subsection (4) and (5) concerning commission officers). Section 16 (chief judicial officer) was amended by 2014 No. 21. Section 18 (disclosure concerning corporate entity) was omitted by 2012 No. 33, with amendments by 2014 No. 21 that could not be given effect. Section 19 (disclosure concerning GOC or rail government entity) was amended by 2013 No. 19, 2014 No. 21, and 2019 No. 9. Section 26 (definition for chapter 3) was amended by 2013 No. 19 and substituted by 2012 No. 33. Section 32 (information to be given to discloser) was amended by 2014 No. 21. Section 43 (vicarious liability) was amended by 2013 No. 19 and 2012 No. 33. Section 46 (right of appeal) was amended by 2013 No. 19 and 2012 No. 33. Section 47 (relocation of public service employee) was amended by 2012 No. 22, 2020 No. 35, and 2022 No. 34. Section 48 (injunction application) was amended by 2014 No. 21 and 2016 No. 63. Section 49 (Supreme Court application) was amended by 2014 No. 21. Section 56 (undertaking as to damages) was amended by 2014 No. 21. Section 73 (definitions for transitional provisions) was amended by 2024 No. 41. Section 78 (continuation of standards) was inserted by 2012 No. 22, transferring standards from the Public Service Commission to the ombudsman as the oversight agency. Section 79 (transitional provision for 2024 amendments) was inserted by 2024 No. 41, confirming that the amendments to section 13 about commission officers apply to conduct occurring before or after commencement. The oversight agency role appears to have shifted from the Public Service Commission to the ombudsman under the 2012 amendments (section 78), and the Crime and Misconduct Commission references were updated to Crime and Corruption Commission in 2014.

Litigation history

The Act does not cite any specific judicial decisions within its text. Section 10 indicates that the Act preserves other remedies and protections, suggesting that litigants may pursue claims under other laws as well. The tort of reprisal created by section 42 is likely to be the subject of civil proceedings, but the provided source does not reference any cases. Section 47 creates a right to apply for relocation to the industrial relations commission, which may generate decisions on the meaning of "likely that a reprisal will be taken" and "only practical way to remove the danger." Section 48 gives the industrial commission exclusive jurisdiction for injunctions involving breaches of industrial instruments, and section 48(4) states that if the commission has jurisdiction, it is exclusive of any other court or tribunal other than the Industrial Court. This may give rise to jurisdictional disputes. Section 44(3) creates an election between damages proceedings under section 42 and a complaint under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991, which could lead to litigation about what constitutes "commencing proceedings" or "complaint accepted." The transitional provisions in sections 74 and 79 contemplate that certain provisions apply retrospectively: section 74 deems disclosures made under the repealed Whistleblowers Protection Act 1994 to be disclosures under the new Act; section 79 applies the amended section 13 to conduct of commission officers whether occurring before or after commencement. These transitional arrangements could be challenged, but no such challenges are mentioned. The definition of "public interest disclosure" in section 11 and the alternative tests in sections 12(3) and 13(3) (honest belief on reasonable grounds, or information tending to show the matter regardless of belief) may be litigated to determine the standard for a valid disclosure. The "unacceptable risk" test in section 31(3) for referrals and the consultation requirement in section 31(4) could also be the subject of dispute. The text contains no case names.

Gotchas

Several provisions in the Act contain traps or nuanced limitations that practitioners must watch for. First, the test for having information is disjunctive: under sections 12(3) and 13(3), a person has information if they honestly believe on reasonable grounds that the information tends to show the conduct or matter, OR if the information tends to show the conduct or matter regardless of belief. This means a disclosure can be valid even if the discloser lacks any honest belief, as long as the information objectively tends to show the wrongdoing. Conversely, a discloser who honestly but unreasonably believes is not sufficient , the belief must be on reasonable grounds. Second, section 13(4) provides that for the purposes of subsection (1)(a)(i) (corrupt conduct), if the other person is a commission officer of the Crime and Corruption Commission, the Commission is treated as a unit of public administration. This is a deemed extension that may not be obvious. Third, section 17(2) requires a person to use a reasonable procedure established by the proper authority for making a disclosure, if one exists. However, section 17(3) provides alternative channels (chief executive officer, Minister, governing body member, supervisor, or an officer with the function of receiving that type of information) that override the procedure requirement. Nonetheless, if no such alternative is available, the person must follow the reasonable procedure or risk a purported disclosure not being made "under this chapter." Fourth, section 30 allows a public sector entity to decide not to investigate or deal with a disclosure on grounds including that it is too trivial and would substantially and unreasonably divert resources. This is a subjective assessment by the entity, but section 30(3) gives the discloser a right to apply to the chief executive for review within 28 days of receiving written reasons. That deadline is strict. Fifth, section 31(3) prohibits a public sector entity from referring a disclosure to another entity if there is an unacceptable risk of reprisal, and section 31(4) requires consultation with the discloser if practicable. Failure to consult does not necessarily invalidate the referral, but creates risk. Sixth, section 39 is critical: a person's liability for their own conduct is not affected by the disclosure. So a public officer who confesses to corrupt conduct still faces disciplinary action or prosecution for that conduct , only the act of disclosing is protected. Seventh, section 45 allows reasonable management action but only if the reasons do not include the fact of the disclosure. A manager who takes action that is objectively reasonable but subjectively motivated by the disclosure will be liable. Eighth, section 42(6) excludes workers' compensation, meaning a person who suffers detriment from a reprisal cannot rely on the workers' compensation scheme and must pursue common law damages. Ninth, section 44(3) creates an irrevocable election between damages under section 42 and an Anti-Discrimination Act complaint , once proceedings are commenced, the other route is barred. Tenth, section 20 allows disclosure to a journalist only after the initial recipient entity has decided not to investigate, investigated but did not recommend action, or failed to notify the person within six months. The six-month clock runs from the date the disclosure was made, not from any subsequent referral. The journalist disclosure is itself a public interest disclosure but journalists are not "relevant persons" and do not gain information through administration of the Act, limiting their confidentiality obligations. Eleventh, for GOC employees under section 19, the disclosure can only be about corrupt conduct of another employee or reprisal conduct , it does not cover the broader categories in sections 12 and 13 for public officers. Twelfth, section 23 disclosures in court or tribunal proceedings are deemed made under section 15(1)(a)(ii) (thing the entity has power to investigate or remedy), but section 23(5) clarifies that this does not create a right to bring proceedings that would not otherwise exist.

How to comply

For public sector entities and their chief executive officers, compliance begins with section 28: establish reasonable procedures. These procedures must address supporting disclosers, assessing and investigating disclosures, taking action on wrongdoing, developing a management program consistent with any standard made under section 60 by the oversight agency (currently the ombudsman), and offering protection from reprisals. The procedures must be published on the entity's website as soon as practicable. The chief executive officer must also ensure proper records are kept under section 29 for every disclosure and purported disclosure received, including referrals from other entities. Records should capture the discloser's name if known, the information disclosed, any action taken, and any additional information required by a standard. When a disclosure is received, the entity should assess whether it qualifies as a public interest disclosure and, if so, whether it falls within the entity's jurisdiction. If the entity decides not to investigate under section 30 (e.g., because the matter has already been dealt with, is too old, too trivial, or better handled elsewhere), it must give written reasons to the discloser. The discloser has 28 days to apply to the chief executive for review of that decision. If the entity investigates, it must provide reasonable information in writing to the discloser: at least confirmation of receipt, description of proposed or taken action, and results. This obligation can be withheld if it would risk safety, investigations, or informant confidentiality (section 32(4)). If the disclosure concerns a matter better handled by another entity, the entity may refer it under section 31, but must not do so if there is an unacceptable risk of reprisal. If practicable, the entity must consult with the discloser before referring on that ground. The referring entity retains its own power to investigate even after referral (section 31(2)). The entity should also be mindful of other laws requiring referral (e.g., to the Crime and Corruption Commission for corruption matters). The management program under section 28 should include training for all public officers on how to make disclosures, what protections are available, and how the entity will handle them. Managers must understand section 45: reasonable management action is permitted, but cannot be motivated by the fact of a disclosure. To rely on the reasonable steps defence under section 43(2), the entity should document all steps taken to prevent reprisals, including policies, training, monitoring, and enforcement actions.

For individuals wishing to make a disclosure, the first step is to check whether the proper authority has a reasonable procedure for receiving disclosures (section 17(2)). If it does, that procedure should generally be used, although section 17(3) provides fallback channels for public sector entities (chief executive officer, Minister, governing body member, supervisor, or an officer with the function of receiving that type of information). The disclosure may be made anonymously (section 17(1)), but anonymity may affect the entity's ability to provide support and information back to the discloser. The discloser should document the disclosure and any response, particularly the date, as the six-month period for journalist disclosures under section 20 runs from the date the disclosure was made. If the entity decides not to investigate or fails to notify within six months, the discloser may then disclose substantially the same information to a journalist (section 20). The discloser should be aware that while the Act provides immunity for making the disclosure (section 36), it does not immunise them from liability for their own conduct that they disclose (section 39). If a discloser suffers detriment because of the disclosure, they have several options: they can bring proceedings for damages under section 42 (the tort of reprisal), make a complaint under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (section 44), or apply for an injunction (sections 48-56), but must choose between the damages claim and the anti-discrimination complaint. Public service employees have an additional right to apply for relocation under section 47. The discloser should keep all records and seek legal advice before choosing a remedy.