Barbara Pocock (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I present the explanatory memorandum and move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

The Greens are taking action to prevent unethical suppliers—like PwC—from securing government contracts.

This Bill is a strong response to the PwC tax leaks scandal and the recent decision to let them tender for government contracts again.

A strong response that has been sorely lacking from this Government.

The Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Amendment (Ban Unethical Contractors) Bill 2025 will strengthen our procurement framework by preventing unethical contractors from winning government contracts.

It will put new requirements on procuring officials to not give contracts to entities or persons who have engaged in unethical conduct.

This should be the bare minimum—we need a national debarment regime.

Australia's Commonwealth procurement framework is weak in comparison to similar countries.

A national debarment regime is not a radical or untested concept.

At least 20 other jurisdictions have a government-wide exclusion framework.

This Bill is the first step towards excluding unethical suppliers from winning government money.

I call on the Government to support this Bill that would establish a national debarment framework with a public register, bolstering integrity and improving transparency.

Australia's lack of a government-wide exclusion framework is an issue.

This has become especially clear after the PwC tax leaks scandal.

PwC is the epitome of an unethical supplier.

They colluded with foreign multinationals to defraud our tax system.

This was one of the most shocking breaches of public trust in recent memory.

They have continuously refused to cooperate with government inquiries.

They have not provided key documents to this chamber.

They are still under active investigation by the Australian Federal Police and the Tax Practitioners Board.

Yet there was nothing in our procurement rules to prevent them from contracting to government.

PwC was never banned from bidding for government contracts but, in the absence of a debarment regime, instead voluntarily stepped aside through a 'mutual agreement'.

The Commonwealth does not currently have a clear power to ban a firm that monetised confidential Treasury information.

This needs to change.

The need for this Bill is overwhelmingly evident as a result of PwC's unethical behaviour.

Despite strong opposition from the Senators involved in this matter, the Department of Finance has allowed PwC back into the fold of government contracting.

Last month, the Department of Finance announced their decision to greenlight PwC for government contracts, despite them misusing confidential government information to help multinational companies avoid tax laws.

Under this Bill's proposed changes, any potential supplier or tenderer who has engaged in unethical conduct that has, or is likely to have, an adverse impact on the integrity of, or public confidence in, the Commonwealth will be prevented from getting government procurement contracts for up to 5 years.

This is consistent with the first Greens additional recommendation in the Senate Finance and Public Administration References Committee's inquiry into management and assurance of integrity by consulting services, which recommended that the Government exclude PwC from government contracting for five years.

There is currently no effective deterrent.

This government has betrayed the Australian people who had very rightly held the expectation that the rogue consulting firm PwC would be held to account.

Letting PwC back into the fold of government contracting sends a message that you can rip off the system and face no real consequence under a Labor Government.

This decision is gutless.

It has undermined public confidence in government procurement.

We need to have stronger rules in place to prevent this from happening again.

Over the past decade, calls have been growing for a national debarment regime in Australia.

Many comparable jurisdictions have debarment and suspension regimes, including Western Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, the European Commission, and the World Bank.

However, in Australia, there is no government-wide exclusion framework at the Commonwealth level.

In 2017, the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) recommended that Australia should adopt a debarment regime to prevent bribery and corruption.

In 2018, the Senate Economics References Committee's inquiry into foreign bribery recommended that the Australian government implement a debarment regime.

In 2020, the Australian Law Reform Commission's report Corporate Criminal Responsibility recommended the development of a national debarment regime to restrict corporations convicted of criminal offences from obtaining government contracts.

According to the ALRC: "allowing criminally convicted corporations to enter into government contracts may undermine public trust in government, endanger public health and safety and increase the risk of misuse of public funds".

Recent submissions to the Senate Finance and Public Administration Reference Committee's consulting inquiry called for a broad Commonwealth debarment regime.

The Community and Public Sector Union said that, in reference to the Western Australian regime, a "similar broad debarment and suspension regime should be developed at a Commonwealth level to be a strong stick to dissuade consultancies from engaging in unethical behaviour".

In addition, the Justice and International Mission Unit, Synod of Victoria and Tasmania, Uniting Church in Australia said that they support the Commonwealth Government "developing a whole-of-government policy to provide for penalties when a consultant engages in unethical conduct or breaches the required integrity standards".

Suppliers are required to abide by the Commonwealth Supplier Code of Conduct, but it does not apply to potential suppliers, only those who are under contract with the Commonwealth. There is already cause for terminating individual contracts, but nothing to signal to potential suppliers that unethical conduct is not acceptable.

A debarment regime would help to maintain public confidence in procurement by preventing irresponsible suppliers and tenderers from securing government contracts.

Commonwealth expenditure on procurement is substantial.

In 2023-24 there were 83,171 contracts published on AusTender with a combined value of $99.58 billion.

This is a staggering amount of money that is spent with very little central oversight.

Labor vowed to crack down on consultants. They had a pre-election pledge to cut spending on external contractors, including consultants.

What do we get instead?

In 2024-25, Labor spent almost $1 billion on outsourcing work to consulting firms.

This is more than the last year of the Morrison government.

This is a business-as-usual approach from Labor following the PwC scandal and a continued lack of transparency by a government which claims to be spending less, while in fact spending even more.

We know that outsourcing public service work to the private sector costs three times as much as hiring public servants to do the work.

It also erodes our public service.

This Bill would prevent unethical contractors from getting government contracts.

This Bill does not require the Minister to intervene in individual procurement decisions. This would risk politicisation and overreach.

Instead, it strengthens the procurement rules to make it clear that government agencies must not reward bad behaviour with contracts.

This Bill would also require a publicly available register of excluded entities to be created. This would hopefully be an effective deterrent against unethical behaviour.

The Greens believe in transparency in government, and we believe that government contracts should go to suppliers and tenderers that can demonstrate ethical conduct.

This Government has recognised that it can use its purchasing power for good.

The Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Act 2025 ensures that businesses with 500 employees or more are required to meet gender equality targets to win government contracts.

In announcing that bill, Minister Gallagher said that the Government was using its purchasing power to better support gender equality outcomes.

While the Greens welcomed those changes, the Government must also use its purchasing power to ensure ethical procurement.

It must send a signal that access to public procurement markets requires compliance with laws and regulations, and ethical behaviour.

This Bill would do just that.

I commend the Bill to the Senate.

I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.