Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Attorney-General, Senator Cash. Today, the New South Wales ICAC has received explosive evidence from a frank and fearless public servant about the dodgy clay target grant for the 'Maguire international shooting centre of excellence'. It's reminiscent of sports rorts, 'pork and ride' and all the other times the Audit Office has repeatedly found that the government prioritised coalition and marginal seats in grant funding in the lead-up to the last election. Why is your government's model for a corruption body designed to not be able to look back at the misuse of public funds? Is it because half your cabinet have been implicated in integrity scandals?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, I will take the end of your question just as trite commentary. The Morrison government, as you know, have made very clear our intent to establish the Commonwealth Integrity Commission. In fact, we have already put in place the required funding for when the legislation for the Commonwealth Integrity Commission is passed.

Senator Waters, you may be aware that we have actually committed $106.7 million of new money to the Commonwealth Integrity Commission. This is in addition to the $40.7 million in funding that we have provided for the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, which will be transferred to the commission. That will take it to a total of $147.4 million.

This is incredibly important legislation and we need to ensure that the model is the right model. As such, we have conducted a nationwide consultation process on the exposure draft legislation to establish the commission. In fact, 333 detailed submissions were received and 46 consultations, meetings and roundtables occurred during the consultation period.

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I have a point of order on relevance. My question went to whether the model would be able to investigate all of the rorts. I know the answer's no, but the minister needs to address that question.

Slade Brockman (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As you say, Senator Waters, your question addressed the model. The minister was being directly relevant as to the model.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said, we are consulting on the model. That was what the exposure draft legislation consultation was all about. The government is now considering the feedback on the model.

Slade Brockman (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, a supplementary question?

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's been more than 1,000 days since this government said it would introduce an integrity commission and yet, two years ago, my bill for a strong, independent corruption watchdog passed this Senate but you've refused to bring it on for debate in the House. The Centre for Public Integrity recently ranked that model as gold standard and your government's model as the weakest in the nation. Why won't you bring on my bill for debate so the Australian people can have the robust, effective corruption watchdog they deserve?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, you obviously did not listen to my previous answer. The government has its own model that it is putting forward. We have sent out the exposure draft legislation. We have received extensive feedback on the exposure draft legislation. We are now considering the feedback on the exposure draft legislation. That extensive feedback through that consultation process—and I took you through the consultation process; it was an extensive consultation process—will now inform the further development of the draft legislation.

Slade Brockman (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, a second supplementary question?

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Liberal backbenchers Ms Katie Allen, Mr Dave Sharma and Ms Celia Hammond have all called for a stronger model that includes a broad definition of corruption, public hearings and letting the commission initiate its own investigations. Meanwhile, Mr Barnaby Joyce described a strong corruption watchdog as a 'Spanish Inquisition' that makes politicians 'terrified to do their job'. Will you listen to those in your party calling for stronger measures, or are the Nationals in charge of integrity policy too?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, this would appear to be your second supplementary, which mirrored your first supplementary, which actually mirrored your primary question. Again, we have undertaken an extensive consultation process. This is an important piece of legislation. It is important that we get the details of the legislation right. That is why the government released the exposure draft of the legislation. That is why we are considering the 333 written submissions to take on board the feedback. And, as I have already articulated, the feedback that we have received will now inform the further refinement of this draft legislation.