Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

You did—which suggested that in some way, shape or form the government, instead of being given credit for what is a really positive initiative, an initiative that has never happened before in the life of the parliament, regardless of what party has been in office, should be criticised. She mentioned that it has taken a number of years for these bills to come before the House. The Labor Party were in office for many years and they did absolutely nothing.

This government has brought forward this legislation which will establish the independent statutory office of the Integrity Commissioner and he or she will be supported by the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity. As the member for Gellibrand indicated, we are fortunate that in the Commonwealth sphere in Australia there is not a system of entrenched or endemic corruption. I do not think anyone has suggested that any of the departments run by the Australian government is in any way, shape or form corrupt. However, an ounce of prevention is better than a tonne of cure and that is why this initiative of establishing the office of the Integrity Commissioner, supported by the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, is an important step. It is vital in a democracy that we have accountable agencies of government. If the Integrity Commissioner and the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity are established, then there will be a powerful disincentive for any official inclined to conduct themselves corruptly to do so.

The member for Gellibrand spent a considerable period of her contribution criticising the fact that initially the Integrity Commissioner will have responsibilities with respect to only the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission. The government obviously wants to see how the Integrity Commissioner will operate. The Integrity Commissioner’s qualifications will be particularly high and he or she will have powers similar to those of a royal commission, including the power to compel people to give evidence relevant to an inquiry even where the evidence is self-incriminating. We have a situation where we do not see we have a problem with respect to the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission but where we want a body to investigate any possible corrupt conduct should that allegedly occur.

The government clearly has, by regulation in the bill, made provision for the addition of other Commonwealth agencies to come within the purview of the Integrity Commissioner and the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity. This is incremental change. It might have been possible essentially to include all government agencies in one hit but, of course, the whole structure of the Integrity Commissioner’s office and the ACLEI would have had to be different if all government agencies were included from the outset. I think that the way it has been suggested in the bill is the appropriate way to go. Two very important organisations, the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission, are initially brought within the purview of the Integrity Commissioner and then, as any bugs in the legislation are ironed out—not that we are suggesting that there are any bugs—we will look at how this legislation is operating and will then consider the inclusion of other Australian government agencies with law enforcement functions, should that be considered to be necessary.

I think the two bodies that are included are highly respected. They play a key role in making sure that we have a great deal of integrity and observation of the law, and the suggestion by the opposition that including only the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission somehow indicates that the government is less than serious about preventing corruption is simply not a credible statement made by the member for Gellibrand and does her no credit at all. I suppose it is a positive thing that we are setting up the Integrity Commissioner’s office and I suppose, in a sense, it is regrettable that, in 2006, it is seen as necessary to have in place this sort of authority, but I think the community has every right to expect that Australian government agencies will be open, accountable and transparent and will observe the law. That the Integrity Commissioner is being established gives to the Australian community a great sense of confidence that, were there any allegations of corruption in the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission, they would be fully investigated.

I am a great admirer of the Australian Federal Police and I suspect the honourable member for Werriwa, who will be following me in this debate, is also a great admirer of the Australian Federal Police, given his prior life in law enforcement. The Australian Crime Commission also does a really important job. We all know that the Australian Federal Police have been heavily involved in security issues in the Australia-Pacific region and were involved in investigations after the Bali bombing some years ago. I suppose, in a sense, we now have so many Australian Federal Police officers stationed around the world that you could almost say, ‘Join the Australian Federal Police and see the world!’ But I tell you what: I have personally observed the way they operate in a number of parts of the globe and they have my unabashed admiration. They do help to make the world a much more secure place.

As has become the habit in this place, the member for Gellibrand has moved a second reading amendment. I want to reiterate that I think she has been excessively negative because, instead of praising this government for bringing in this legislation, after 100 years plus of federal government, and after many years of the Labor government, which did nothing, we do have this positive legislation before the chamber and the member for Gellibrand and honourable members of the opposition really ought to be saying to the government: ‘Well done. No other government has done this before. You have. We support you all the way.’ While they say they do not want to prevent this bill from having a second reading, when you look at the second reading amendment it is entirely negative and unsatisfactory. I think that the tactics undertaken by the opposition in this matter probably help to undermine the confidence of the Australian people in our parliamentary system because there is too much oppositionism for oppositionism’s sake. This is positive legislation. Even the opposition say that it is good as far as it goes, but then they want to go even further. The government, in this legislation, has made provision for the inclusion of additional bodies as the government may determine by regulation.

The opposition wants any bodies which are to be added or subtracted to be added or subtracted by legislation in this place. We all know what the parliamentary sitting program is like. We all know what the parliamentary business program is like. What you need is flexibility. The way to have flexibility would be to be able to add—and I suspect it would be always a question of adding rather than subtracting—additional Australian government bodies as required.

This is important legislation. I think that the government deserves every credit for helping to improve the confidence that the Australian people have in the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission. As other bodies are added, as undoubtedly they will be, and as the legislation settles in, that will assist the Australian people to have confidence that any allegation of corruption will be fully and appropriately investigated.

I want to come back to something I said at the outset. Happily, in Australia there is no entrenched culture of corruption at the Australian government level. I do not think it has ever been seriously suggested that any government has been seriously corrupt. But it is important to have in place the necessary mechanisms to ensure that, were allegations of corruption to arise, they would be quickly and expeditiously investigated by people of appropriate seniority and integrity. I am particularly pleased to be able to support all of these bills currently before the chamber.

See this speech in context