Chris Hayes (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

As a member of the Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, I too would like to make a comment on the annual report of the Integrity Commissioner. It is important to realise that corruption can take many forms. It could be a conflict of interest, improper associations, nepotism or cronyism. It could be the abuse of office or the abuse of power, perjury, inappropriate disclosure, the fabrication of evidence, fraud or theft. These are possibilities that occur with the transmission of power. Traditionally, the way of dealing with those matters would be very much a reactionary model. Dealing with corruption would take the form of awaiting the processes of the judicial system. If a suspect was first investigated and there was sufficient evidence, a charge would be laid before the courts. Court proceedings would eventually involve a verdict. One way or another, that would be evidence or otherwise of corruption.

Since 2006, with the establishment of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, there has been a bipartisan attempt to have a very proactive model to look at integrity within law enforcement. ACLEI itself oversees the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission, particularly in instances of alleged corruption within those organisations. Having said that, I know from my involvement with those bodies that the AFP as well as the ACC have very fine internal integrity processes, and they are to be complimented on that. But, when we increase the powers of organisations such as the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission and when we give them coercive powers, particularly in respect of the latter, it is only proper that we take all practical steps to ensure that that power is not abused and that integrity is uppermost in the minds of people who exercise that power on our behalf. This process is important not only for public safety but also for public confidence in our systems of law enforcement.

Given that organised crime costs this country between $10 billion and $15 billion a year, it is reasonable to expect that the tentacles of organised crime can easily find their way into corrupt practices within various organisations, regardless of who they are administered by. ACLEI has a direct responsibility not simply to ferret out criminal acts within the Australian Federal Police or the Australian Crime Commission but also proactively to set the standards of proper conduct within those organisations.

Since late 2006, ACLEI has identified a steady increase in potential areas of corruption within those organisations. As a consequence, it has enhanced its own intelligence-gathering capacities as well as employing good collaborative relationships between other federal and state intelligence services. I too welcome the additional funds which have been allocated to ACLEI in this budget, an extra $1.6 million over the next four years.

See this speech in context