Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Hansard source

The saying goes that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I think it is better that we assume that those in the federal political class are not above reproach. We should acknowledge that we are human and some members of government and the Commonwealth service can and will occasionally wander from the high road. It was in January 2018 that I said at the National Press Club that we need to do more to improve transparency in government and have greater accountability in government to rebuild trust in our democracy.

In January 2018, I and our shadow Attorney-General announced Labor's intention to establish a national integrity commission. I said then that politics as usual in 2018 wouldn't cut it, considering the year that we had in 2017 with travel rorts and other matters, but I couldn't have predicted the intervening years between then and now. But we did commit Labor then to create a national integrity commission, a federal body modelled on the lessons of the state anticorruption bodies. It would be a national integrity commission to resolve the gaps and inconsistencies in our current system and be designed to ensure the highest standards in public administration.

It wasn't about partisanship then; it was about building trust. I then said that, if the government of the day wanted to move on this before Labor could form a government, they were welcome to do so. They have not though, or they have done so insufficiently. It's about restoring the faith of people in their representatives in the system of government. Then I said:

I’m not putting this policy forward because I’m aware of any corrupt conduct—if I was, I would report it.

I'm not sure I would say the same thing though. In other words, I think the actions of this government that have been revealed—their actions they took before the election to win the election—now more than ever, underline the need for a national integrity commission. I said then it had to be independent and well-resourced, secure from government interference, and it needed a broad jurisdiction, effectively operating 'as a standing royal commission' with all those investigative powers 'into serious and systemic corruption' in the public sector and those who deal with the public sector. We said then that it should have discretion to hold public hearings when it considers this to be in the public interest. We even outlined it could have a commissioner and two deputies, each serving one fixed five-year term, but, importantly, be appointed by the parliament on a bipartisan basis. The commissioner would make findings of fact, not law, and then refer them to the Commonwealth Department of Public Prosecutions if appropriate. It would report to parliament annually, overseen by a joint standing committee.

It was a big move then but one which I and the shadow Attorney-General had been consulting on for months, if not years, beforehand, to talk about the principles that were outlined. I'm pleased to say that since the election the new Labor leadership has re-endorsed its commitment to this approach. But, today, I would suggest the reform is now even more important than it was two years ago. At a state level, anticorruption commissions have provided a valuable check on unscrutinised power. It is imperative that standards apply, that wrongdoings are exposed and that the public be informed. This will create a better culture—a cultural of accountability and standards rather than a culture of cover-up, hubris arrogance and accounting with impunity. Public support for this reform is only increasing over time and, little wonder, we live at a time where the concept of political shame is in fast retreat. When the attitudes of 'whatever it takes' and 'anything goes' are on the rise, we see in this public life the increasing rareness of ministerial responsibility.

The Prime Minister doesn't like to be told when he's wrong. He has a trademark stubbornness. Sometimes that is a strength, but at other times that is ignorance. A stubborn refusal to eject any of his ministers from cabinet is not explicable by the norms of ministerial responsibility. The tawdry saga of the sports rorts scandal outlined today in the parliament by our leader Anthony Albanese slows the politicisation of the system.

The politicisation of infrastructure and regional grants is a grim story indeed. We know that Senator McKenzie was the sacrificial lamb for the sports rorts scandal, sent down on the technicality of not declaring a membership of a gun club, worth under $300, when in fact it was the impropriety of the whole scheme that made her individual disclosure failings pale into insignificance. How have we got to a state of affairs in this nation where the consequence of these rorts can be described as 'a miracle' on election night? Has anyone else faced consequences or a penalty for this rorting of public finances to try and win an election at any cost? Has anyone apologised to the public over the complete bastardisation of these grants programs? Has anyone explained to all of the clubs who think that they were playing on a level playing field that they weren't—for this mishandling, misspending of public money? No, not this mob. The member for Hume remains on the frontbench despite his trademark bungles and scandals.

When I look at my opposite number, the member for Fadden, things are much worse. Mr Morrison's predecessor, Mr Turnbull—who it must be said seemed to believe in ministerial standards to a greater extent than the current Prime Minister—actually ejected the member for Fadden from cabinet following a series of decisions by the member for Fadden. What did the current Prime Minister do, knowing all of this—knowing that Mr Turnbull considered that the member for Fadden shouldn't be in the cabinet? He rewarded his friends who voted for the spill, encouraging Mr Dutton to run, and miraculously switched back the votes against Mr Dutton once the vote actually occurred. Never have so few been rewarded so well for doing so little.

What has the new Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and Minister for Government Services done since his Lazarus-style resurrection to cabinet? Some $4.6 billion has been ripped out of the NDIS, and 1,200 Australians with disability have died while waiting to get on to this national scheme. As for the government services portfolio he's presided over, there has, I think, been perhaps the greatest scandal in social security that any government has seen. I'm speaking of course of robodebt. How can a government find no-one responsible for issuing hundreds of thousands of illegal letters of demand on their own citizens? It's causing untold stress and untold harm. I've spoken to mothers who believe their children took their own lives because of the pressure of these robodebt letters. Court cases have had to be commenced. We've seen tens of millions of dollars unjustly taken by the Commonwealth from some of the most vulnerable citizens in the country.

It is a scandal. When the government doesn't have the power to take money and still does because it can, because its the biggest financial operation in the Commonwealth, and then hangs onto the money and forces citizens who were illegally issued with debt notices to go to court to recover the money that the government never had the power to take in the first place—that's a scandal. The only explanation is that when they set up the scheme they (1) didn't get legal advice (2) got bad legal advice or (3) got good legal advice and ignored it. But, at any level, how can we get a government so complacent that it can issue taxpayer money—infrastructure grants—on an unsubstantiated basis to sports clubs who didn't deserve it and not give it to sports clubs who did, or indeed a government that can issue social security letters of demand that it doesn't have the power to issue? Are there any consequences for ministers in this government? It's anything goes.

The government have a sense of deep-seated hubris and arrogance—that because they won the last election that now validates anything they've done since, when, as time goes on, they're underhanded rorting of taxpayer money will show that their election victory was built on the back of taxpayer money that was not given out in the proper way. So, we need to have a national integrity commission. Of course, the most reluctant gentleman I've ever seen to be leader of government business—I speak of Minister Porter—says: 'We're getting on with it. Don't worry about what we've actually done; don't worry about what you can see. Just move on. We're getting on with it.' Their approach so far on the national integrity commission could be described as weak, ineffective, secretive, incompetent, negligent and nonexistent.

As the shadow Attorney-General has pointed out relentlessly, the Attorney-General has belled the cat on what this government thinks passes for an integrity commission. Today the Attorney-General, Christian Porter, made it clear that his proposed integrity commission is so feeble—he didn't use the word 'feeble', but you'll see why I call it feeble in the next few moments—that it will not be able to investigate the Morrison government's sports rorts scandal. Mr Porter today claimed falsely that existing state and territory integrity commissions can only examine matters where a crime has been committed. On ABC Radio National this morning Fran Kelly interviewed the Attorney-General. I will read a few lines. Fran Kelly said:

Well, it's an integrity commission, it's investigating matters of integrity. That doesn't necessarily mean criminal offences.

Attorney-General Porter said:

That's just not correct. So, integrity commissions or corruption commissions or whatever they're called, investigate things which are written into statute as offences.

Fran Kelly asked:

But not the sports grants?

Attorney-General Porter said:

Neither the police nor integrity commissions investigate things that aren't offences. That's just how it works.

The reality is that integrity commissions have a much wider brief to investigate corruption by politicians and public officials. Every existing state and territory integrity commission is able to go beyond the criminal law and examine issues of corrupt conduct and integrity.

I think the government hopes that, with the important and troubling coronavirus, somehow the sports rorts matter and other decisions of this government will go unscrutinised. As they say, this government does not want to waste a crisis. It is appropriate that we tackle the coronavirus, but this nation is capable of doing more than one thing at a time. I actually think that this government has an obligation to the parliament and to all our voters to demonstrate that the political system is not broken and that democracy is not broken. Surveys time and time here and around the world show that an increasing number of our citizens and citizens around the world feel that democracy just doesn't work in the interests of the people anymore, that the fix is in and that individual votes can't change anything. Well, let me be very clear. Democracy, with all its failing, is still the least-worst system we have. It certainly needs improvement. One improvement we can make is a national integrity commission.

This government has flaws that deserve the attention of independent investigation. Question time isn't working the way it should. Despite the questions we ask, this government simply doesn't care anymore if it misleads the House or if it doesn't answer the questions. In an ideal world though this government would demonstrate some integrity now. We need to demonstrate that our democracy is not broken and that the parliament can deal with obvious problems, with scandals and with matters that go to the integrity of the allocation of taxpayer dollars.

We need to do more than just have a national integrity commission. Time doesn't permit me to talk about our need for electoral reform and our need to demonstrate that our democracy is not for sale to the highest bidder with the deepest pockets. I'll save my remarks on that for another occasion. It is well beyond time that this government joined Labor in standing for a strong independent national integrity commission with real powers to let the sunshine in. We need to restore faith in the way that government works. We need to restore faith in the way that politics works. Indeed, before I conclude my speech I'm going to restore faith to the people who are interested in debating in the parliament so, Mr Deputy Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the House.

(Quorum formed)

See this speech in context