Andrew Murray (WA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Justice and Customs. Does the government accept that without Western Australia’s Corruption and Crime Commission, Queensland’s Crime and Misconduct Commission and New South Wales’s Independent Commission Against Corruption it would be difficult or unlikely for corruption to be investigated and exposed to the extent it has been in those states? Does the minister agree that corruption does not exist only in those three states? Given the crucial role of these anti-corruption commissions, why is the federal government not interested in setting up a federal anti-corruption commission with a similar charter and similar powers to those state commissions?

David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Justice and Customs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the learned senator for his question. Coming from Western Australia, as he does and as I do, we share a keen interest in government corruption, unfortunately. What I can tell him with respect to the Commonwealth’s disposition regarding coercive powers relating to the corruption of parliamentarians and/or federal enforcement officers is that there is an extensive matrix of legislative framework that is available which mirrors, in many respects, the two individual commissions that he mentioned. The Commonwealth has very strong laws directed against corruption. A number of these are set out in part 7.6 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code Act 1995. As I said, they very  much mirror many of the powers and format of the two corruption commissions the senator mentioned. Giving a bribe to a Commonwealth public official and the receipt of such a bribe are criminal offences carrying a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. ‘Commonwealth public official’ is defined very broadly and includes, for example, members of federal parliament, federal public servants and federal judicial officers.

The giving of a benefit to a Commonwealth public official, in line with the definition I have just given you, or the receipt of such a benefit that would tend to influence that official in the exercise of his or her duty, is an offence carrying up to five years imprisonment. It is not necessary to prove the official was actually influenced. Abuse of public office is also a criminal offence carrying a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment. This offence is made out where a Commonwealth public official—and I revert to the definition, which includes parliamentarians—uses their influence, exercises their duties or uses information received in an official capacity with intent to obtain a dishonest benefit for themselves or for another person or causing detriment to any other person. The rules, the framework, the regulation, and the model are there, I can assure you, Senator.

These are just some examples of the relevant offences. Of course, the Australian Federal Police has broad, extensive investigation powers and powers of coercion with respect to search warrants and other powers. Any person who believes that they have evidence of corruption involving a Commonwealth public official should obviously refer this to an appropriate law enforcement agency—in most cases, the Australian Federal Police, as I have said. It would be a matter for that agency, which of course has oversight of the integrity commission, to assess whether that evidence was sufficient to merit further investigation and ultimately whether charges and a formal prosecution would be required to be issued.

In addition to the criminal penalties that I have set out applicable to corruption offences, an offender is liable to have their Commonwealth-funded superannuation entitlements cancelled pursuant to the Crimes (Superannuation Benefits) Act 1989. So the public official not only can be prosecuted criminally but also can have the benefits they have obtained whilst a public official taken off them. In some respects, this goes further than the state regimes. An MP under sentence for an offence punishable by one year’s imprisonment or longer is disqualified from sitting in parliament. Again, in some jurisdictions this goes further than what the states have enacted.

The Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity is vested with authority to investigate corruption issues involving staff members of a law enforcement agency. A law enforcement agency is an agency that has a law enforcement function that has been prescribed in regulation. (Time expired)

Andrew Murray (WA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I thank the minister for his answer, but the minister would recognise that his answer focused on offences and penalties and not so much on the investigating capacity of the bodies concerned. Does the minister recall that Mr McGinty, the Attorney-General of Western Australia, described his own commission as a ‘standing royal commission’? Does the minister concede that there is a strong demand for higher political standards and political governance in Australia, and does the minister believe that the government might be of a mind to review this issue and perhaps consider an anti-corruption commission again, based on current experience and trends?

David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Justice and Customs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can say that, in terms of standards, given the recent history, particularly in some states—namely my own, unfortunately—I can say that governance and standards are low. We have observed various events which cause considerable consternation in Western Australia. The doctoring of reports by that state parliament to suit commercial interests is of great concern. Could I reassure the senator by saying that the Commonwealth has a very extensive and very successful matrix of rules and particular laws, and of course the Australian Federal Police has very heavy oversight of these matters. On a Commonwealth basis, I would have no hesitation in saying that it is not a matter of standards and governance. I could not say the same for the states. (Time expired)