Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2) together:

(1) Clause 173, page 141 (lines 24 to 26), omit subclause (1), substitute:

(1) There must be a Chair of the Committee, who:

(a) must be elected by the members of the Committee from time to time; and

(b) must not be from a recognised political party that forms part of the Government.

(2) Clause 178, page 146 (after line 17), after subclause (2), insert:

(2A) The decision to approve a proposed recommendation must be supported by at least a two-thirds majority of all of the members of the Committee.

(2B) Paragraph 173(5)(b) does not apply in relation to a vote on a decision to approve or reject a proposed recommendation.

The reality is there will always be powerful interests seeking to persuade the government of the day to downgrade the effectiveness of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. We need to ensure that, as elected representatives, we have a mechanism to watch the watchdog. I believe there is an opportunity to do something truly unprecedented in this place through the establishment of an independent commission by appointing a majority of non-government members to the parliamentary joint committee overseeing the National Anti-Corruption Commission. Why? Because for an agency such as this to be beyond reproach it must stand for and hold itself accountable to that which is larger than the government of any day—that is, the entire parliament.

I would like to see the bill amended on two elements, both of which would strengthen the National Anti-Corruption Commission's independence from the government of the day. The first of these is an amendment to ensure the chair of the committee is a non-government member of parliament. The second is an amendment to ensure the approval of the appointments to the commission is subject to a special majority.

During this debate, I have been a fierce and consistent advocate for the establishment of a multipartisan, balanced parliamentary joint committee to perform the role of oversight of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. I commend the government for the inclusion of just such an independent committee in this bill. However, in its current form the committee's independence has been overly compromised. The requirement that the chair be a member of the government and for that chair to hold the casting vote over commission appointments is a serious limitation upon the committee's true independence.

I note in the joint select committee's advisory report that the evidence provided by a range of expert witnesses supported just such a proposal. Witnesses at the inquiry argued that appointments should be subject to a vote requiring a special majority or a majority including either at least one member of the opposition or both Independents. I also note the coalition committee members indicated a super majority vote in these circumstances would be a desirable bipartisan confidence in the positions of commissioner and inspector to make it essential.

Strengthening the commission's independence in this way would help limit any undue influence and ensure we are setting up an enduring legacy that will be in place long beyond any electoral cycle, both in the immediate future and over the longer term. If this government can bring itself to truly place faith in the institution it has helped create, then the departure from tradition is warranted and would be seen as a historic and courageous stance taken by a government which is prepared to lead, not control. I commend the amendments to the House.

See this speech in context