Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Hansard source

I've got some general questions for the Attorney-General around the establishment of a national anti-corruption commission. The first of those would be whether it's correct that the Morrison government is terrified of an independent anti-corruption commission being established, because the government is terrified of the Australian people discovering what it has been up to behind closed doors? I have a further question as to whether or not the Attorney-General has been doing all he can to delay the establishment of a national anti-corruption commission, because he and the Morrison government are terrified of the many, many scandals that've occurred on this government's watch being investigated by such an independent body? And I don't just mean the scandals that we know about from the work of the independent Auditor-General and the work of investigative journalists.

I'd ask why it is that the Morrison government has been slipping and sliding around on the issue of establishing a national integrity commission, trying to avoid making any real commitments, despite having committed to establishing such a body in December of 2018, almost two years ago, and also, despite having said at that time, on 13 December 2018—in a press conference, in fact, conducted by the Prime Minister, Mr Morrison, and by the Attorney-General—that they had been working on establishing a national anticorruption commission since January of 2018, almost three years ago? Now that the government has been dragged, kicking and screaming, to admit that a national anticorruption commission is needed, and has at last, years late, released draft legislation for such a body, can the Attorney-General explain why the model he has proposed has been excoriated by virtually every integrity expert and legal authority in the country as a sham that fails virtually every test for an effective integrity commission?

You would think, given that there is now an integrity commission in every state and in both territories, it might have been possible for the government to come up with a model that actually learned the lessons from those integrity commissions that have been established in the six states and the two territories. Can the Attorney-General explain why it has taken him almost three years to produce a model for a national anticorruption commission that the Centre for Public Integrity has examined closely and concludes, in these terms:

Christian Porter's proposal would be the weakest watchdog in the country …

…   …   …

They're setting that bar so high for investigations that they wouldn't be able to investigate 'sports rorts' or the Western Sydney airport deal …

Can the Attorney-General explain why it has taken him almost three years to produce the model for a national anticorruption commission about which Stephen Charles QC, one of the more eminent lawyers of our country, a former judge of the Victorian Court of Appeal and one of Australia's leading anticorruption experts, said:

It's an attempt to protect ministers, politicians and senior public servants from investigations into serious corruption.

Can the Attorney-General explain why it has taken him almost three years to produce the model for a national anticorruption commission that former counsel assisting the New South Wales ICAC Geoffrey Watson SC has described as a body 'designed to cover up corruption, not expose it'?

Does the Attorney-General agree with Anthony Whealy QC, former judge of the New South Wales Supreme Court, who has examined the government's model closely and concluded:

It's a crying shame the government will not give this body an effective way to control corruption in the public service and the Parliament …

The real reason for that is they are afraid of it and how it might affect them.

Does the Attorney-General agree with David Harper AM QC, former judge of the Victorian Court of Appeal, who has examined the government's model closely and concluded:

The draft legislation released today falls well short of what is required for an effective anti-corruption commission. The model proposed by the Government will fail to ensure corruption is stamped out at the Federal level. A toothless watchdog that fails to hold politicians to account risks further eroding confidence in our political and democratic processes.

Can the Attorney-General explain his comments claiming that his proposed sham of an integrity commission would be 'more powerful than a royal commission', when it would not have power to investigate conduct that does not constitute a criminal offence and would not have the power to conduct public hearings, as every royal commission since Federation has had? (Time expired)

See this speech in context