Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I present an interim report of the Finance and Public Administration References Committee on consulting services, and I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

This report that I am tabling today on behalf of the committee comes about through a number of circumstances. Knowledge of the actions of PwC have become more apparent through questions on notice that have been placed by various colleagues through committees but also particularly through the estimates process a few weeks ago and through some advice that was provided to us by the Clerk in relation to the events of the Department of Treasury referring the PwC matter to the Australian Federal Police. That has necessitated the committee taking some care in the way it's continued with this inquiry.

The Clerk's advice has been extremely useful to us in that process. It's been comprehensive. It's been valuable to, I think, all members of the committee. We certainly thank the Clerk for the work that has been done in providing that advice to the committee and assisting us in our deliberations. In fact, it's one part of that advice as to how we might proceed that has brought us to the point that an interim report has been prepared. That was one of the mechanisms that was mentioned as part of that advice as to how we might continue with this process, bearing in mind other advice that had been provided to us, that we needed to be careful that we didn't create a pool of evidence that would inhibit the capacity for these matters to be properly aired in any potential legal proceedings. I'm of the view that that's where we'll end up.

Another piece of advice that's also acknowledged in the report is that we not have people who may be subject to legal proceedings who deliberately want to come before the committee put on the record matters that then cannot be used in any subsequent legal proceedings. So the committee is proceeding carefully. But this report is really quite deliberate. It's titled in a very deliberate way, PwC:A calculated breach of trust, because that's how the committee sees the actions that were undertaken by Mr Peter Collins. He was given the privilege of being part of a consultation process on new legislation that was being proposed to deal with multinational tax avoidance and to ensure that tax on earnings earned in Australia was paid in Australia. It was a significant reform being undertaken by the then government. It was a significant part of our conversations with other jurisdictions.

What becomes clear from the emails that have been tabled through the efforts of my colleagues is that this is not just an Australian matter; it extends internationally. There are email addresses that have UK addresses and US addresses. This is something that was being worked on and negotiated globally. We haven't got that far in the context of our investigations at this point in time, but there's no doubt in my mind that other jurisdictions should be looking at this matter, what has happened here in Australia and the links to it that come from the email trails that we currently have. It would be in their interests to do so. I'm sure my colleagues, when they get to their contributions, will agree that PwC Global shouldn't be able to cauterize their involvement by trying to make out that this is a local issue. It is not. It is clear from the little that we have at this point in time that it goes much more broadly than that. It became apparent once those emails became available but also through some of the other evidence that we've already received.

This is not just a calculated breach of trust, but it's an egregious one, very much so. It's a breach of trust in so many different ways. In the evidence that's been provided to us through a number of committees, PwC resisted attempts to find out what was going on. They used legal mechanisms to try and prevent, first, the ATO, and others, from investigating what was going on; all the while, Mr Collins continued to sign further confidentiality arrangements. It beggars belief that this is what was happening. It also impacts on so many others that work within that organisation. We have 36 or 63 names, however many names, that might have been involved on email lists, and all of those people—some of whom, we understand, may have just been on an email list and, therefore, only received an email—have this hanging over their heads and potentially impacting on them.

PwC doesn't seem to understand that it's their responsibility to deal with this—to provide appropriate information to the Australian community and the Australian authorities. They've handed over to us a list of 63 names and then said to us, 'Don't publish it,' but we don't have the background information to know the depth of involvement or otherwise of any of those people. The fact that they can't seem to even get that right or understand what their responsibilities are as a part of this process actually compounds the problem.

So we have made this report that highlights some of the issues and demonstrates how they've attempted to hide what's been going on. As the Secretary of the Department of Finance told us in Finance estimates, they initially said, 'No, it was just one person.' Then it was nine, and now it's more, but we don't know who they are. Those nine will not be involved in any engagement with government projects. It's time that they came clean. It's time that they told the Australian community and the international community what was going on. It's time that they cooperated with the investigations that are being undertaken so that we can understand what went on—the Australian community deserve to understand what went on. But, quite frankly, they also owe a duty of care to all of their employees not only so that those that weren't involved can understand that their name is clear, get on with their lives and get on with being an effective part of the Australian community but also so that those that need to be brought to account can be brought to account.

There are two very simple recommendations at the end of the report: fully and openly comply and cooperate with the investigations of the AFP and the Tax Practitioners Board. That's not unreasonable. You would think that you wouldn't need to make a recommendation about that matter, but we have—and it's clear. They should be open and honest with the Australian people and the international community and accurately publish information about who was involved so that those that aren't involved can pay a duty of care to their communities and employees and get on with their lives.

I acknowledge the work of the committee secretariat in pulling this report together. They've done a mighty job since we decided last week to pull this report together. It's not long. It's relatively graphic though, I have to say. I also acknowledge my colleagues Senator Barbara Pocock and Senator O'Neill for the work that they've done in bringing this to light. This is not the end of the process. This is an interim report based on the advice that we received from the Clerk as to how we might progress this. There will be more, and we, of course, will be talking to other members of this industry, sector or community, if you like, as the work of the committee continues.