The ICAC Act defines unsatisfactory conduct and as conduct engaged in by a public officer (whether or not the identity of the public officer is known) or by a public body:
- that involves illegality, impropriety, negligence or incompetence; or;
- that is connected to public; and
- which results in:
iii) substantial mismanagement of public resources; or
iv) the inappropriate or significantly ineffective use of public resources; or
v) substantial mismanagement in relation to the performance of official functions; or
vi) substantial detriment to the public interest.
With respect to the above paragraph, incompetence:
- is conduct that would not be engaged in by a reasonable public officer of public body:
- having the skills and knowledge reasonably expected of a person or body with the role of the public officer or public body; and
- having taken appropriate steps to obtain adequate resources, information and advice.
- does not include:
- that is less than best practice; or
- that is a matter of policy about which reasonable public officers or public bodies may disagree.
Unsatisfactory conduct does not include any conduct engaged in by a judicial officer in the performance of judicial functions.