Page 4828 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 27 November 2018

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


coherence of the new commission. I would like to put on the record now my thanks to Assembly members for the way in which we have been able to work together across party lines through this process. Of course, given the different approaches and perspectives of the parties, it was not always possible to incorporate all proposed amendments. But I am sure MLAs who contributed to this process will be able to see many of their suggestions incorporated into the bill.

I am confident that the bill I am presenting today will establish a commission that will be effective in deterring and combating any risk of corrupt conduct in public administration, while also strengthening confidence in ACT governance and decision-making processes. The government also considers that the bill strikes the right balance between creating a commission with the necessary significant coercive and intrusive powers and being compliant with obligations under the Human Rights Act 2004. A significant number of provisions in the bill are based on the Victorian Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission, IBAC, and its legislation. This is the case because the ACT and Victoria are the only jurisdictions which have human rights legislation.

I would like to address some of the key aspects of the bill. The government has considered the committee’s recommendation in relation to the definition of corrupt conduct and has amended its definition to more closely reflect the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption definition.

I note that the committee agreed with the government that the commission’s focus should be on serious and systemic corrupt conduct. The government remains of the view that minor misconduct or allegations of inappropriate behaviour should not be within the commission’s jurisdiction. This position is consistent with the 2017 select committee report. There are numerous existing provisions and oversight mechanisms in place for dealing with the misconduct of, for example, members of the Legislative Assembly, statutory office holders, ACT public sector employees and third-party contractors. These mechanisms, we believe, sufficiently deal with these matters.

The commission’s principal focus should be on the sort of conduct that would bring the ACT’s decision-making processes and reputation into serious disrepute. The commission should not be a clearing house for extremely low-level internal misconduct complaints. The government considers that the right test has been developed and included in this bill, following extensive discussions across parties.

The bill requires mandatory reporting by all senior public servants and members of the Assembly, as well as ministerial and opposition leader chiefs of staff, and creates an offence for failing to comply with this mandatory reporting requirement, following a recommendation from the 2018 select committee. It is important to note that this mandatory reporting provision is not in effect in any similar pieces of legislation in other jurisdictions. The government, in agreeing to the committee’s recommendation, intends to send a clear message to every senior public official that an obligation rests with them to maintain the highest ethical standards themselves and within their teams and that, if they suspect serious wrongdoing in their own areas or across government, they are beholden to report it to a body with the powers to fully investigate it.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video