Louise Miller-Frost (Boothby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In 2021, when I started doorknocking in Boothby, people talked to me about a lot of issues. Lack of action on climate change was high on the list, as we watched once-in-100-year-floods happening month after month in the eastern states. The previous government's appalling treatment of women was high as well. But probably the No. 1 issue I heard of from people as I doorknocked and met with them at community events and spoke to them on the phone was integrity. People simply did not trust the Morrison government. They talked to me about sports rorts. They talked to me about car park rorts. They told me about the Leppington Triangle or, as it's more commonly known in South Australia, the Sydney Airport land deal. They talked to me about a company based in a shack on Kangaroo Island getting some multimillion dollar contract, and a tiny not-for-profit being given $444 million they hadn't even asked for, for the Great Barrier Reef—with no process. They talked to me about regional jobs and investment rorts. By that stage, I thought we all needed therapy. They were all distressed at the waste of taxpayer funds. They were angry at the blatant flaunting of a lack of process, and they were exasperated at a government that, despite being caught out again and again and again, and despite making headlines time after time after time, just kept doing the same thing: treating the public like idiots and mugs—nothing to see here!

But mostly the people of Boothby talked to me about why we didn't have a federal anticorruption commission. They held out hope that this anticorruption commission might fix the terrible route that the former government was heading down, might restore respect, might restore our international standing so they could talk to their friends and families overseas without having to make excuses for and be embarrassed by our government. Remember, this was a time when our standing on the international anticorruption index had dropped a precipitous 12 points to its lowest standing ever. It wasn't just the Australian public thinking things were going wrong, an objective international index was saying it on the world stage. How embarrassing.

That was the regime that those opposite oversaw over the last decade and the residents of Boothby were appalled, but, of course, they didn't know the half of it. At the time that I was talking to them, when they were telling me how much they wanted integrity reinstated in our government, none of us knew that the former Prime Minister Morrison had had the Governor-General secretly install him into five ministries. The departments of health; finance; industry, science, energy and resources; treasury and, finally, home affairs—in addition to his appointment to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Crucially, there was no public record of this having occurred. No-one knew. No-one in parliament knew. So when parliament has the role of holding ministers and government to account they didn't know. Certainly the public were not told. The Australian public that we are all ultimately responsible to were kept in the dark. Not even the ministers that he was co-ministers with knew what he had done. What a team—where your leader holds you in such respect that he deceives you, even those said to be close friends. Imagine your boss trusts you so little that he installs himself in your position with your powers just in case he wants to overrule you at any stage but apparently that's all okay with those opposite. The fact that the former Prime Minister deceived the public, deceived the parliament, in fact, deceived them was okay. The interesting conundrum is that the former Prime Minister obviously knew that it was wrong enough to keep it secret from everyone, but then the reason we found out about it was that he bragged about it. Bizarrely the reason that the Australian public, those opposite and all of us here a found out about these secret ministries was that the former Prime Minister bragged about them to journalists writing a book about him. Did he think he was to be congratulated for his deception?

On 30 November in this place a censure motion was debated noting that the secret ministries undermined responsible government and eroded public trust in Australia's democracy. The former Prime Minister's response offered no real rationale, just the usual dissembling deflection that we have become so used to in recent years. And then those opposite got up to congratulate him. They shook his hand. They congratulated him. They hugged him. They didn't just vote against the censure motion—apparently it's all okay—they actually congratulated him. I'm not sure that I've ever congratulated anyone for deceiving me. It was a sight to behold. Not everyone, I'll give you that, but a large number. I will particularly mention the member for McPherson, one of those directly affected when the former Prime Minister had sworn himself into her then portfolio of home affairs, who has called out his behaviour and showed the integrity we would expect in this place and abstained from the vote. I will also mention the member for Bass who voted to support the censure motion. But the rest voted against the censure motion. They voted to send a message to the former Prime Minister, and of course to any future prime ministers, that it was okay to deceive them. They voted to send a message to the Australia public that they didn't care that he had deceived the Australian public. But one thing that is plainly apparent to even the most casual observer of politics is that when politicians are seen to be deceiving the people they represent democracy pays the price. It is a break in the social contract that enables democratic representation. Our society and our country relies on strong democratic institutions. These institutions must be accountable to the public.

The ANU Australian electoral study released a report in 2019 that tracked the decline in satisfaction with our democracy. While satisfaction with our democracy was working in 2007—it was a healthy 89 per cent of respondents—by December 2019 it had fallen to only 59 per cent. This is the context upon which the former Prime Minister set about undermining our democratic conventions and norms. The previous government certainly had an accountability problem and that's probably a bit of an understatement. However, we the Albanese Labor government say no. We say this isn't good enough. We take seriously our contract, our article of faith with the Australian public and, surprising as it is, we now need to actually legislate to stop such egregious abuses of power happening again in the future, and so we come to this bill.

This bill represents the bulk of the government's response to the Bell report, the report of the inquiry into the appointment of the former Prime Minister to administer multiple departments, led by former High Court Justice the Hon. Virginia Bell AC. It provides for greater transparency and accountability in Commonwealth administration. It will ensure that the Australian people are able to access information related to the composition of the federal executive council, those appointed to administer the government. As the Attorney-General said in introducing this bill, it demonstrates this government's readiness to act promptly to restore the Australian people's confidence in our federal system of government, and to rebuild integrity in public institutions and democratic accountability.

Deputy Speaker Buchholz, as you well know, in Australia, we operate under a responsible system of government. Basically, that means our ministers, including our Prime Minister, are accountable to this place and to the parliament for their actions, and ultimately to the Australian people. That is why we come in here in question time and ask questions of our ministerial colleagues. It is why we know which minister is responsible for what—so that we know to whom to ask the questions. It is an exercise in accountability. How can that accountability function if we don't know who is actually administering which department and which portfolio? When the government referred these matters to the Solicitor-General, Stephen Donaghue, KC, Dr Donaghue advised that the principles of responsible government are fundamentally undermined by the actions of the former government. He continued, 'It is impossible for the parliament to hold ministers to account for the administration of departments if it doesn't know which ministers are responsible for which departments'—a fairly basic concept.

As many of my colleagues have said in this place already, there is something almost bizarrely ironic about the Prime Minister's repeated justifications for his actions. He claims that no-one could understand the position of Prime Minister in a crisis. Perhaps we could go with him on that point for the first—the ministry of health. COVID certainly was a crisis different from that we have seen in living memory. But it doesn't explain why he would keep it secret. In fact, if it was an important step made to secure the country, surely the country would be pleased to hear it had been taken, comforted that such a step had been made. But no, he chose to keep it secret. Nor does it explain why over the next year and a half he took on a further four portfolios. What is the rationale for that? We don't know. We all know that a minister can be sworn in quickly to replace another, so the rationale that ministers might get unwell and he might need to be able to replace them very quickly makes no sense. After all, he seemed to be able to find it very easy and convenient to get himself sworn into ministries on a regular basis. And what if he got unwell? Should we have had someone sworn in as a back-up Prime Minister as well? What a nonsense. But what I think is so offensive to so many Australians about the former Prime Minister's typical refusal to take responsibility for his actions is that, at the same time he was misleading and hiding the truth from the Australian people, he was asking them to extend him an extraordinary amount of trust. He was asking Australians to forgo their usual freedoms in the service of a greater good to protect the most vulnerable amongst us during the pandemic. He was encouraging Australians, reassuring them by seemingly bringing us into his trust, his confidence and he betrayed that trust. All along he was playing us, the Australian public, as mugs, keeping vital information from us because he knew better than us, better than centuries of convention. Of course, he also betrayed the trust of his colleagues. It was not enough to undermine good, responsible government by failing to notify the public of his secret ministries. The former Prime Minister also failed to tell those whose jobs he secretly took.

It is a sad day in this country that this bill is required to make sure that future elected officials abide by long-standing and honoured conventions, yet here we are. Along with the National Anticorruption Commission, this bill aims to start to fix the loss of trust the Australian public has with elected officials, and to fix the lack of accountability we saw in the last government. I commend the bill to the House.

Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Higgins, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022. When the multiple ministries scandal involving the former Prime Minister detonated in August of last year it left Australians reeling, but also breathing a sigh of relief. They had dodged a bullet; they had kicked out a carcass of a government reeking of corruption from rorts, political stacking and a warped ideology intent on marching over the weak and notable also for it self-aggrandisement despite its chronic underperformance on multiple fronts, ranging from climate, women's economic development, integrity and resilience building. The multiple ministry scandal has been scorched onto our national psyche. This assault on a democracy already resting on shaky pillars represented the former Prime Minister's plot to sew himself and his government into power for good. At the end of their term, they resembled a syndicate operating in a moral vacuum rather than a government working in the national interest. And the people of Higgins and elsewhere noticed. Whilst this saga may have eroded public confidence in government, it has been heartening to watch how swiftly the Albanese government acted to install more robust legislated safeguards to ensure this never happens again.

The explanation proffered by the former PM was a convoluted word salad designed to obfuscate rather than to enlighten. I was none the wiser at its conclusion, but can only speculate that he used the cloud cover of the pandemic to amass power. It was a violation of the Westminster system of government and an abrogation of cabinet process. It also exposed the Commonwealth to risk over any disputed contracts involving the then PM. It speaks volumes that today's modern Liberal Party boasts precious few who are prepared to stand up for accountability and sanction the former Prime Minister. Instead, they circle the wagons and double down, confecting moral outrage directed at the parliament over this being a witch-hunt. Despite their cabinet being completely undermined—hobbled, even—they held fast to the party line, putting self above the national interest. With one exception: I commend the member for Bass for having the moral courage to cross the floor in the name of democracy. Why her colleagues acquiesced with the former Prime Minister is unfathomable, and history will judge them accordingly.

If anything, this parliament's historic censure of the former Prime Minster last November should instil some assurance that the basic democratic principles of responsible government, integrity, accountability and transparency remain alive in his House. The Albanese government is trying to starve corruption of oxygen. As a mark of this commitment, we wasted no time in establishing and inquiring into the legality of the former Prime Minister's actions. On 26 August last year, Hon. Virginia Bell was appointed to lead an inquiry into the implications of the former Prime Minister's clandestine self-appointment to five additional ministerial portfolios. These included health, finance, industry and science, energy and resources, home affairs and Treasury. Indeed, Bell's conclusions affirmed the blow this power grab struck to public trust in government. The Albanese government has responded with legislation to ensure that the Australian people always know who their ministers are.

Allowing no time to elapse after the release of Bell's report, we have started legislating its recommendations into the Ministers of State Act. These reforms will enshrine the checks and balances required to prevent further attacks on our democracy and expunge the possibility of Australians, the parliament or executive government ever being ignorant of who is running the show. Specifically, this bill will require the Official Secretary to the Governor-General to publish a notifiable instrument, registered on the federal register of legislation, that the Governor-General has chosen, summoned and sworn an executive councillor to the Executive Council, appointed an officer to administer a department of state or directed a minister of state to hold an office. It will also require notification of the revocation of any of these positions. It's importance cannot be understated: a defence against the slippery slope of autocracy. The Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 is this government's message to the Australian people that integrity and trust in government matter, and that we will not delay or deny the need to restore either.

It is important to reflect on the how rather than the why that the multiple ministries scandal arose. Events of this magnitude do not occur de novo unless the scene has been set. Indeed, the ministry scandal was a low point in a pattern of poor behaviour of the former government, which had become normalised because there were no consequences. Systems had been weakened, people silenced or public institutions neutered.

Hence we have turned our eye to hardening the public sector against corruption with a suite of measures as part of our overarching integrity agenda. In the wake of the termination of the secret trial of Bernard Collaery, the Albanese government intends to strengthen public sector whistleblower protections. Specifically, this tranche of reforms will enforce a positive duty on public sector agencies to protect whistleblowers. It will include: better education of officials; protections for witnesses; improved oversight of roles for watchdogs like the Ombudsman and Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, who oversee our national security agencies; improved sharing of information; and streamlined investigative processes.

These reforms could have been implemented sooner if not for the antics in the Senate in December last year by the Greens, who, with the coalition, scuppered release of the report from the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee on amendments to whistleblower protections. We intend to deliver these reforms, not delay them, and remain hopeful that they will be in place before the National Anti-Corruption Commission is established.

Our bill will implement 21 recommendations of the 2016 Moss review and other parliamentary committee reports that were parked by the previous Liberal government, as part of a wasted decade of talk and not enough walk. We have also started a long overdue review of all secrecy provisions in Commonwealth legislation. We are particularly concerned about protecting press freedom, which is why the Attorney-General convened a roundtable with media organisations on 27 February this year. Journalists should feel free to do their job without fear of going to jail. Like the NACC, press freedom is key to holding government to account.

These reforms around protecting press freedom emerged from a joint committee on intelligence and security in 2020 and from the Senate standing committee in May 2021, but nothing was advanced—again, a footnote in the wasted decade of Liberal rule. The omission of action by the Liberals threatened press freedom, which is perfect for a government with an aversion to scrutiny. While public trust in the judicial system is high, we recognise that it cannot be taken for granted. This is why the Albanese government has given in-principle support to the establishment of a federal judicial commission in response to recommendations by the Australian Law Commission, an institution established by Gough Whitlam.

Misconduct by judges is rare, but it can have devastating effects on ordinary people, amplified by the asymmetry of power. Hence we want to ensure that complaints can be handled in a transparent and independent way so that trust in the judicial system is not eroded and Australians get that fair go. The fair go, like press freedom and human rights, are seeds that need cultivation in a thriving garden of democracy. Pour toxic killer on them, in the form of a power hungry, morally bereft government, and you get a fertile ground for corruption to gain a foothold.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I give the call to the opposition chief whip, on a point of order.

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I've listened patiently, but I refer the member for Higgins to standing order 90 in her reflections and wording about members.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have been listening. I will caution the member for Higgins, who has the call.

Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Higgins, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

People like my constituents Hayley and John, who are awaiting the resolution of their son's NDIS case through the now defunct Administrative Appeals Tribunal, intimately understand, like robodebt victims, that corruption adversely affects lives. With a staggering 67,000 cases on foot at the end of 2022, the AAT was not living up to its mission statement of being accessible, fair, just, economical, informal and quick. This was confounding when once it was glowingly described by the then Attorney-General Philip Ruddock, of the Howard era, as an institution that led the world in administrative law, innovation and best practice.

So, what happened? Corruption took root and thrived. Successive Liberal governments appointed at least 85 former Liberal MPs, failed Liberal candidates, former Liberal staffers and other close associates, some individuals without the requisite expertise, while thumbing their nose at transparent, merit based selection. It was cronyism. This litany of mismanagement fatally compromised the independence and technical competency of the AAT.

Looking under the hood revealed more problems—unsustainable finances; delays, such as a median of 77 weeks for FOI lodgements and 31 weeks for NDIS cases; and multiple legacies of electronic systems from a poor amalgamation restructure—which drove up inefficiencies and costs. The decay of the AAT is a salutary lesson of how an ideological quest for small government can leave devastation in its wake.

Debate interrupted.