House debates

Wednesday, 23 November 2022

Bills

National Anti-Corruption Commission Bill 2022, National Anti-Corruption Commission (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2022; Second Reading

5:27 pm

Photo of Bridget ArcherBridget Archer (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Integrity is the cornerstone of democracy. I'm so pleased to be standing here today to speak in support of the National Anti-Corruption Commission Bill 2022. The road leading to the establishment of this bill has been long, sometimes difficult and emotionally testing, but I cannot adequately express how deeply grateful I am to be standing here today as we take the final steps towards rebuilding trust with the Australian people.

Two years ago this month I first spoke in this place on the importance of the establishment of an integrity commission, one that was a key promise of the coalition at the 2019 election, and just one year ago I stood in this House to second a motion by the member for Indi to suspend standing orders to allow her Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill to be debated. As I said at the time, this was not a decision I took lightly at all. It was difficult. But I held a strong view then, as I do now, that the establishment of a robust integrity commission was of the utmost importance. We owed it to the Australian people to deliver a commission they could have faith in, and not least because this was a promise that we had made to them.

In fact, it was a study of the 2019 federal election that saw some startling statistics, and as an elected representative I was shocked and saddened. The Australian Election Study, conducted by the Australian National University, found that Australian's satisfaction with democracy was at its lowest since the dismissal in 1975. Just 59 per cent of Australians reported being satisfied with how democracy was working, down 27 percentage points from the record high of 86 per cent in 2007. Professor Ian McAllister, who led the study, said that the findings were a wake-up call, going on to say:

In one of the most worrying findings from our study, a little over one-in-10 Australians, 12 per cent, believe the government is run for 'all the people'.

In contrast more than half, 56 per cent, say government is run for a 'few big interests'.

…   …   …

With faith in democracy taking major hits all over the globe, winning back the people's trust and satisfaction would appear to be one of the most pressing and urgent challenges facing our political leaders and institutions.

He concluded:

I've been studying elections for 40 years, and never have I seen such poor returns for public trust in and satisfaction with democratic institutions.

Only nine months after the 2019 election, any trust we did have was put to the test, as public officials across Australia asked so much of their constituencies as the pandemic took hold. The pandemic is a good example of why there needs to be a high level of trust so that our communities can have confidence in the advice we're giving them. As elected representatives we cannot take any trust we do have for granted, and nor should we ever believe or act as though we're above reproach. We must do everything we can with the power and privilege that we hold in this House to build back the trust that has eroded over time. And as we are the only jurisdiction in Australia without an integrity commission, this is much overdue.

Throughout my first term as the federal member for Bass I spoke with many members of the northern Tasmanian community who wanted to see measures put in place that ensured that politicians were accountable for their actions. Despite some within this place dismissing the establishment of an anticorruption commission as a fringe issue and not an issue that our communities care about, I had no doubt that it is deeply important to Australians. Some of the communication I've received from constituents in my own electorate and across Tasmania include: 'Now more than ever we need strong ethics in government. We need an ICAC with teeth, a strong national anticorruption body that can actually enforce the ethical standards necessary in a functional democracy.' And: 'Politicians should not have a different set of rules to everyone else. Exposing corruption needs to be seen to be done to restore public confidence in our political system.'

Many in my community also expressed much frustration over the lack of consequences for public officials. There's a strong perception that there's one set of rules for parliamentarians and another for the general public. Right across the private sector, businesses have put checks and balances in place to ensure that their employees are held to a certain standard, with repercussions in place for breaches. Parliamentarians should be no different, was the sentiment of many northern Tasmanians—and they are right. During question-and-answer sessions with a group of migrants a few years ago I was struck by the focus on trust in government and trust in those elected to represent their constituencies. With many having migrated from countries where corruption by public officials was rife, this level of concern was understandable.

While I don't believe we're in dire straits, last year it was reported that Australia had plummeted in Transparency International's latest Corruption Perceptions Index, the world's most cited ranking of how clean or corrupt every country's public sector is believed to be. Australia fell by four points on the 100-point scale in 2021. And while we were ranked seventh out of 180 countries in 2012, level with Norway, last year we had fallen to 18th while Norway had moved up to fourth place. Some may consider 18th of 180 reasonable, but these findings concern me. Democracy is fragile, and it requires vigilance to protect it.

At the core, this bill is about restoring public trust and is explicitly anticorruption, which is important. But I also want to see an increased focus on the positive promotion of integrity in public life. When it comes to those involved in politics, a pro-integrity focus can help lay the strongest foundations for building public trust and ensuring that the public has confidence in our democracy. And it may seem idealistic, but if elected representatives were to view their actions and decision-making on matters, no matter how big or small, through the lens of integrity, we may start avoiding some of the challenges that continue to overshadow much of the good work undertaken in all levels of government.

While I am overall supportive of this bill, there are a few areas that in my mind need refining, including what constitutes corrupt conduct. I'm of the firm belief that any definition must be viewed through the lens of how it will ensure trust and confidence in our public administration for people who interact with government. Additionally, as raised by the member for Clark, it's a necessary part of the integrity framework that we must also look at in ensuring that strong protections are in place for whistleblowers who do come forward. Far too often, people's lives are destroyed when they come forward to report wrongdoing. I note that the Attorney-General has acknowledged that there'll be additional legislation to deal with this issue, and I look forward to reviewing that in further detail when it becomes available.

I commend the member for Clark for his tireless dedication to this issue over many years, and I reconfirm my support for strengthening protections for whistleblowers. I believe that the number one job of a local member is to listen to their community—their issues, challenges, needs and desires—and to take those views to Canberra. As such, any project delivered or funding secured for the northern Tasmanian region while I've been the member is, I believe, due to the strong representation I bring on behalf of my community. So it's disheartening to see that there's a level of scepticism that exist in communities across the country when it comes to the funding of projects. As parliamentarians we need to take the necessary measures to bring back public trust in how government funding is utilised and delivered.

A significant source of debate on this issue has centred around whether there should be a public versus a private approach to any hearings, and this is certainly a component of the legislation that has concerned my community. This is a matter I've explored at length, and I'm inclined to support amendments during consideration in detail to remove the exceptional circumstances test in favour of a public interest test. I believe it's an unnecessarily high bar, and ultimately discretion should rest with the commission. It's also of critical importance that the public has confidence in how the government of the day supports the NACC committee. Should the government of the day not follow the recommendations of the committee with regard to finances and resources, I think it's reasonable for the minister to explain their reasons to the parliament, and I'm of a mind to support amendments that will achieve this.

Notwithstanding these improvements that I would like to see, this is a good bill and worthy of the House's support. I sincerely look forward to seeing this legislation passed with broad support because, as I've previously expressed, any bill put forward must be a result of nonpartisan collaboration. It cannot be a political instrument, or it will be doomed to fail before it begins and it will be in my view counterintuitive to enhancing trust. I believe that what we have in front of us today has succeeded in this goal, and I do want to congratulate the government and in particular the Attorney-General for the work that they've undertaken to get to this point.

I'd also like to acknowledge and thank the work of my own colleagues the shadow Attorney-General and the member for Menzies on the work that they've have undertaken on this bill. Since taking on his role after the recent election the shadow AG's door has always been open to me, and we have had many constructive conversations on this issue. The member for Menzies is a wonderful asset to the parliament. From our many discussions I know how important the establishment of an integrity commission is to him, and he has worked diligently in his role on the committee reviewing this legislation. Indeed the entire committee deserves much credit for the work that they did in a very short time frame to provide a comprehensive report on the legislation.

Many people have championed this cause over many years, but of course I believe that there's one person in particular who deserves acknowledgement for the fact that we are finally here today debating this critical piece of legislation. It would be remiss of me not to mention my friend the member for Indi, who has worked incredibly hard to help shape a commission that not only is anti corruption but has a focus on the positive promotion of integrity, and she has led that by her example and in particular her commitment to bringing everyone on the journey. The member for Indi's unwavering determination is to be admired and applauded, and I'm proud to have had the opportunity to work with her.

Democracy is a value we cherish in Australia, and indeed Australians have fought and died to uphold and defend our democratic freedoms. We must remain vigilant to threats that would erode it, and integrity is central to that aim. This legislation strengthens our democracy, and I commend the bill to the House.

Comments

No comments