David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Attorney-General, Minister Watt. Currently, two whistleblowers are on trial for telling the truth about government wrongdoing. David McBride blew the whistle on war crimes in Afghanistan. Richard Boyle exposed unethical debt recovery practices at the ATO. In November, McBride will be the first person on trial in relation to war crimes in Afghanistan—the whistleblower, not a war criminal. Has the government sought advice on whether the A-G should exercise his discretion, under the Judiciary Act, to discontinue these unjust prosecutions?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

ator WATT (—) (): Thank you, Senator Pocock, for the question. I can certainly assure Senator Pocock and the whole chamber that the Attorney-General is strongly of the view that integrity and the rule of law are central to Australia's criminal justice arrangements. The Attorney-General's power to discontinue proceedings is reserved for very unusual and exceptional circumstances.

Senator Pocock referred to two cases: Mr McBride and Mr Boyle. As their proceedings remain ongoing, it is obviously inappropriate to comment further on the particulars of their matters; however, I do note that the government is committed more broadly to delivering strong, effective and accessible protections for whistleblowers. The government has already delivered priority amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act and will commence a second, broader stage of reforms, which will include public consultation on broader reforms to the Public Interest Disclosure Act to provide effective and accessible protections to public sector whistleblowers and address the underlying complexity of the scheme. It will also, as part of that consultation, address the need for additional support for public sector whistleblowers, such as a whistleblower protection authority or commissioner.

The government is delivering on its commitment to ensure that Australia has effective frameworks to protect whistleblowers, which are critical to supporting integrity and the rule of law. Reforms to the Public Interest Disclosure Act are long overdue, and significant reform is required to restore the act to a scheme that provides strong protection for public sector whistleblowers.

Senator Pocock, as I say, I'm not really able to comment on the individual proceedings that you've mentioned, and we'll obviously wait to see how they play out in the courts. But, as I say, we do very much believe in protection for whistleblowers, and already, in our first 16 months, we've begun work on some major reforms to strengthen those protections.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pocock, first supplementary?

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Minister. As a matter of principle, why does the government think that it's in the public interest to prosecute whistleblowers while at the same time running on a platform of integrity and admitting that our whistleblower protections are not up to scratch? You're saying you've got another tranche but, in the meantime, we're going to prosecute whistleblowers.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Senator Pocock. I think, as I say, we are getting a little bit close to commenting on particular proceedings that are on foot at the moment. As I mentioned in my earlier answer, the Attorney-General's power to discontinue proceedings, as I think you're implying we should, is reserved for very unusual and exceptional circumstances.

You question our commitment to the protection of whistleblowers. I've already outlined to you some of the actions that we've taken just in our first 16 months. Having delivered those amendments to the Public Interest Disclosures Act, we are now beginning work on a second, broader piece of work to strengthen reforms to protect whistleblowers further. I think the fact that we have begun work, through the Attorney-General, on this matter so early in our first term does make it clear that we understand that these are significant issues that do need reform. Unfortunately, they weren't reformed by the former government, but we're already taking action on that front so early in our term, and I think that demonstrates our commitment.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pocock, second supplementary?

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Minister. Will the government commit to a time frame for the second phase of PID reform and the discussion paper or consultation on the establishment of a whistleblower protection authority?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Pocock. What I can tell you is that the government has commenced work on the second, broader stage of reforms to the public sector whistleblowing framework. As I say, that work involves public consultation on redrafting the Public Interest Disclosure Act to ensure it provides effective and accessible protections and to address, firstly, the underlying complexity of the scheme and, secondly, the need for additional support for public sector whistleblowers, such as a whistleblower protection authority or commissioner. It's been nearly seven years since the Moss review recommended reforms to the Public Interest Disclosure Act. Since then, as I've said, this government has delivered reforms to strengthen the Commonwealth's integrity framework, including by establishing the National Anti-Corruption Commission. When this second period of consultation is completed, we'll closely examine what further reforms may be required to ensure that we have an effective whistleblowing framework.