David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

In relation to the documents produced in relation to PricewaterhouseCoopers, I move:

That the Senate take note of the documents.

These documents have literally just been produced by the government and by the Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport in response to an order for the production of documents the Senate passed regarding texts and/or similar messages between AFP Commissioner Kershaw and PwC partner Mick Fuller, who of course was also a former police commissioner in New South Wales and is also a close friend, a mate, of Australian Federal Police Commissioner Kershaw. The order for the production of documents required the production of all communications between the AFP Commissioner and his mate Mick Fuller, the partner in government relations, actually, in PwC, from 1 July last year to the date of the order. That was of course required because over almost the whole of that period—indeed, we now know this from a meeting commencing 28 July 2022—the AFP Commissioner was intimately involved in the crafting of a contract for PwC to review the Australian Federal Police operations in the ACT.

We now know from the documents that have been produced that Commissioner Kershaw actually attended a meeting on 28 July 2022 with his mate Mick Fuller. It was described as:

An introductory meeting to outline the identified need to undertake a comprehensive independent review of the AFP's delivery of policing services to the ACT government—

And, get this—

This informed PwC's consideration of whether they had the capability to undertake the work and would submit a formal quote.

The meeting, of course, was not minuted. So two mates get together—one the AFP Commissioner, the other a former New South Wales Police Commissioner, now a senior partner in government relations at PwC—in an unminuted meeting to work out how PwC can get money from the AFP, to cobble together the best possible way that PwC can make money off the AFP. There was no tender and no public discussion. It was just two mates, some other partners from PwC and the chief operating officer from the AFP coming together to work out how they can give PwC more money and also, at significant public expense, to try and reshape the future of the Australian Federal Police operations in the ACT.

Then there was another meeting on 5 September 2022 between Kershaw and Fuller, another meeting on 13 October 2022, another on 2 November 2022 and another on 1 December 2022. When we asked Commissioner Kershaw in budget estimates if he'd ever put in a conflict-of-interest declaration in relation to the contract and his contacts with his mate when he was crafting the contract for him, we got the most arrogant possible response from Commissioner Kershaw. Brushing it off—he didn't have to do that! He didn't have to put that in! Integrity wasn't for him—that kind of integrity measure! He was the Australian Federal Police Commissioner; he could do whatever he bloody liked! He'd didn't put a conflict-of-interest form in. He was having meeting after meeting with his mate about a contract for three-quarters of a million dollars and he was in the initial meeting actually shaping the contract—the Australian Federal Police Commissioner and his mate Mick Fuller, partner in PwC.

If you want to know why we had that previous debate about PwC and why Senator Pocock and other senators on that committee are so indignant about the breach of public faith and the absolute breaches of conflict of interest, we've just got the answer now in these documents produced. This is PwC using its mates, inveigling itself into, in this case, the heart of the Australian Federal Police and manipulating those contracts and those mateships to actually form the contract—without a tender and any public discussion—and sucking in another quick three-quarters of a million dollars out of the public purse.

If you want to talk conflicts of interest, who's now investigating whether or not PwC was in breach of its obligations and in breach of the law? Who is investigating that? The Australian Federal Police. That's the same organisation the commissioner was in, hobnobbing with his mates, giving them money. If it was an episode of Utopia you would say: 'That is way out of line. That couldn't possibly happen. It's implausible.' But, no, that's the very recent reality.

All of that, I might add, was on this government's watch. I am not saying the conduct is only related to this government's watch, but this all happened on this government's watch. You can't say this is something that happened in 2018 or 2016. This has all happened in this financial year under this government. It's extraordinary.

But it gets even more interesting when you look at the documents that have been produced. One of the things that I was concerned about in budget estimates was what, if any, other communication had happened between Kershaw and Fuller, the current and former police commissioners. Now, of course, one of them is a PwC partner. One of the reasons we wanted to know the full breadth of the communication was to establish the extent of the conflict of interest, the extent of the friendship and the extent of the communications that they were having while they were crafting the contract and notionally managing the contract together. What did we get from the government? We got a public interest immunity claim. They won't produce the full extent of the communications between Kershaw and Fuller. They refuse to produce them. We got told: 'I note the extraordinary scope of the order relating to the production of private communications without limit as to subject. The production of these documents could unreasonably infringe the privacy of individuals and would not be in the public interest.'

All we asked for were the communications between the current Australian Federal Police Commissioner and the current partner in government relations at PwC, who was his mate and a former police commissioner. We only asked for them from 1 July onwards while this whole contract business was being undertaken. That's what we asked for and what the government is refusing to produce, hiding behind a public interest immunity claim and saying it's not relevant. I can tell you now it's 100 per cent bloody relevant. What on earth else was passing between these two while they were crafting a contract, manipulating the arrangement, getting a three-quarters-of-a-million-dollar contract sorted out and having taxpayers pay for it. Then the one bit of information we did get from Kershaw about the exchange was this. I asked:

Have you had any communication with Mick Fuller since the PwC scandal broke?

Kershaw said:

I have had one SMS from Mick.

He said 'Mick'. I asked:

What did it say?

Then Kershaw said this:

He's disappointed with what's occurred. As in the conduct, not of him of course, but of the firm.

That's what Kershaw said in estimates. But what do we find now in the documents that have been released? The government says the exchange, on 24 May 2023, was:

Mr Fuller: 'Just saw news re referral. Will give you some space so not too complicate your life'

Commissioner: 'Ok thx mate

That's not what he told estimates. Do we need to continue this investigation? Absolutely. Do we need a spillover hearing on this? 100 per cent. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.