David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

As I pointed out earlier, of the people who believe that there was no need for exceptional circumstances, may I just out that the Labor Party before the election was in that group, and you potentially would have been sitting alongside us on this one. Given the importance of this, I really do want to stress how important this is to so many Australians. This last election many Australians cast their vote thinking about transparency, wanting more transparency and more accountability, and elected a government who promised a NACC—which, as you point out, you're delivering. But a key part of that was public hearings, where it was in the public interest.

If the Senate would indulge me, I will just read some of the responses that I've had sent in to me. Susan Vickers in Red Hill says:

A federal integrity commission is crucial. Hearings should be public in interests of transparency and accountability.

Sarah in Giralang says:

This is really important, we need public hearings and action taken on outcomes. There needs to be a tightening on lobbyists and review of media power as this influenced election outcomes and ministerial decisions.

Caroline Reid in Fraser puts it:

The NACC Bill must be amended further as per Helen Haine's defeated amendments to ensure that public hearings are not restricted in any way because the low rate of prosecution of politicians through ICAC processes is too low to act as a deterrent against pork barrelling, nepotism and fraud.

Lastly, Gary Shapcott from Woden says:

A NACC that investigates secrecy, corruption and sleaze in government IN SECRET HEARINGS ain't gonna build public trust in government. A NACC is supposed to deliver TRANSPARENCY and accountability to the public, not another layer of smoke and mirrors.