TRADE unions are urging that whistleblower legislation be expanded beyond government organisations to include all employees of agencies that receive federal funds, such as nursing homes.

Representatives from the Queensland Council of Unions and the Queensland Nurses Union told a federal government committee that public servants should not be the only people covered by whistleblower protection legislation.

Steven Ross, industrial officer with the Queensland Nurses Union, said the union received many calls from nurses wanting to complain about private aged care facilities but who were afraid of reprisals.

Mr Ross said that last week anon-member had reported that unlicensed staff had access to dangerous drugs at an aged care home.

"Unlicensed staff were checking dangerous drugs before providing them to residents,'' Mr Ross told the committee.

"These staff were also in possession of the keys to the dangerous drugs cupboard.''

Mr Ross said only registered nurses were legally allowed to have these responsibilities. But the person would not give their name or say where they worked, for fear of incrimination.

He was speaking at a public hearing of the House of Representatives standing committee on legal and constitutional affairs in Brisbane.

The committee is conducting an inquiry into whistleblower protections in the public sector and will report back on a preferred model for such legislation.

Bundaberg Base Hospital whistleblower Toni Hoffman also gave evidence at the hearing, but this was closed to the public and the media.

Ms Hoffman, a nurse at the hospital, alerted local politicians about her concerns about surgeon Jayant Patel in 2005.

Dr Patel will face 14 charges, including three of manslaughter, at his committal hearing in February next year.

Ms Hoffman spoke to The Australian outside the public hearing and said a new, robust, independent body with "real teeth'' was needed to deal with complaints made by whistleblowers.

"I think you should still have to go through the internal processes (in a hospital) first,'' she said. ``But if you don't get any satisfaction, I think there should be some sort of independent organisation you can go to.'' The organisation should be independent of government influence and have bipartisan funding.

Griffith University senior law lecturer AJBrown, project leader of a recently released report on Australia's whistleblower protections, said the view to extend the scheme to cover federally funded bodies was "sound'', with some caveats.

Dr Brown said the legislation should apply even to organisations that received a small amount of government funding, depending on what employees wanted to blow the whistle on.

"If they've got a $5000 grant to do something for the community with commonwealth money, if that's not being delivered ... then (employees) should be able to make a disclosure internally and they should not have to suffer any reprisals for it,'' he told The Australian.

But employees should not be protected by the legislation if they complained about frivolous matters such as organisational politics or employment issues.

Source: The Australian - Sarah Elks