Melissa Parke (Fremantle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity I present the committee's report entitled Inquiry into the operation of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006—final report. I ask leave of the House to make a short statement in connection with the report.

Leave granted.

Over the last two years the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforce­ment Integrity has been conducting an inquiry into the operation of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006—otherwise known as the LEIC Act—and fulfilling a statutory requirement within that act for such a review to occur. The final report, which it is my pleasure to present today, adds to existing recommendations made in an interim report tabled last February. The committee is pleased that one of those recommendations, the addition of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service to ACLEI's jurisdiction, has already been accepted and acted upon by the government.

Since it last reported, the committee has continued to consider the extent of ACLEI's jurisdiction and, on that question, has contin­ued to endorse a governing ethos based on corruption risk. In essence, those agencies with the highest potential corruption risk should be subjected to ACLEI's oversight, ensuring the application of measures and resources that are commensurate with the degree of risk.

The committee has now recommended the establishment of a second tier of jurisdiction within the LEIC Act for agencies assessed to be of intermediate risk. While those inher­ently higher risk law enforcement agencies, such as the AFP, ACC and Customs, would continue to be subject to full ACLEI oversight, second-tier agencies would receive a more limited degree of ACLEI supervision. This arrangement would enable limited corruption oversight of medium-risk agencies while preserving ACLEI's effect­iveness and ability to manage with appropriate resources. ACLEI would have the opportunity to establish a relationship with medium-risk agencies that fulfil a law enforcement function of some kind to build resistance to corruption through education, awareness raising, ongoing communication and investigation as appropriate.

Based on the evidence provided during the course of this inquiry, the committee recommends, as a minimum, that the Australian Taxation Office, CrimTrac, the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre, the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, and the Department of Immigration and Citizenship be included within the scope of a newly established second-tier jurisdiction. The committee has also proposed a relationship between ACLEI and non-law enforcement but related Commonwealth agencies that would capital­ise on ACLEI's unique experience and understanding of corruption issues. This includes continued collaboration with the Australian Public Service Commission to provide ethics training to the Public Service and the creation of the means for any agency to request ACLEI's assistance in a corruption investigation in appropriately defined circumstances.

The committee does not make any of these recommendations as a result of any actual or perceived corruption in second-tier agencies or within the broader Australian Public Service, but simply because the potential for corruption in such agencies makes it appropriate that they have the benefit of an effective, limited relationship with ACLEI.

As the Premier of Queensland, the Hon. Anna Bligh, noted in a speech reflecting on that state's approach to integrity in the aftermath of the Fitzgerald inquiry:

Despite the inevitable embarrassment from time to time, I would much rather live and work in a system which is not afraid to pick up the rock and discover the ugliness underneath than one that is content to leave the rock alone and assume that an undisturbed rock is a sign of good health.

The committee continues to endorse an integrity approach that assumes the not unlikely existence of corruption wherever the incentive for corruption exists. For this reason the committee continues to emphasise the need for enhanced corruption detection and prevention measures.

The committee's interim report addressed ACLEI's ability to proactively engage in corruption prevention measures, noting concerns extending back to the establishment of the LEIC Act. It is essential that ACLEI expands the range of corruption detection and prevention activities currently undertak­en, as these objects of the LEIC Act have not been matched by appropriate legislative functions to date. In enhancing the operation of the LEIC Act, the committee has also recommended that the definition of corruption be further developed to provide a more detailed and comprehensive description of potential corrupt conduct for the purposes of the act. The committee considers that this would provide greater clarity to the anti-corruption work conducted by ACLEI, while serving to more effectively delineate corruption issues from issues better handled by other agencies.

Finally, the committee considered the large amount of evidence provided in relation to broader issues of Commonwealth-wide integrity, including suggestions for greater coordination between existing integrity agencies and the possible establish­ment of a Commonwealth integrity commission. While the current efforts of agencies, including the Australian Public Service Commission, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the ANAO and ACLEI, contribute to Commonwealth integrity, the committee is left with the impression that more needs to be done. The committee certainly received evidence that suggested the need for anti-corruption measures which extend beyond narrowly defined law enforcement functions. The committee has therefore recommended that the government conduct a review of the Commonwealth integrity system, with particular examination of the merits of establishing a Common­wealth integrity commission for the entire Commonwealth public sector.

I am very pleased to table this final report. I thank the committee members and the secretariat for their work on this inquiry. In particular I would like to express my thanks to former committee members Senator Doug Cameron and Senator Steve Fielding for their contribution to the work of the committee. I also welcome new members Senator Lisa Singh and Senator Penny Wright and our committee secretary, Dr Jon Bell, who has taken the reins from Mr Tim Watling and who joins the very capable Bill Bannear and Rosalind McMahon on the secretariat.

Finally, I would like to extend my thanks to the many organisations and individuals who provided evidence to the committee. Their contribution has been essential to the work of our committee, and I thank them for their time and effort.

See this speech in context