The finance department has found consultancy firm PwC Australia is an ethically sound company and recommended the end of a long-term ban on it working with the government, despite an ongoing police investigation into the company.
But the firm, which sold its entire government consulting business for just $1 at the height of a scandal over the misuse of confidential Treasury information, will not be able to tender for government work until at least 2028 due to a non-compete clause with its spin-off, Scyne Advisory.
In April 2024, the finance department and PwC Australia agreed on the firm’s exclusion from new government work while it grappled with the fallout from the damaging tax leaks scandal.
The exclusion allowed PwC Australia to conduct an overhaul of its culture and processes, and led to the conclusion of two parliamentary inquiries into the matter.
The ban also allowed the finance department to conduct its own examination of PwC Australia’s ethical soundness and whether it had done enough to regain its trust.
Sign up: AU Breaking News email
Guardian Australia has seen a decision from the finance department’s acting assistant secretary, Richard Windeyer, confirming the department had decided the ban on PwC Australia should be lifted.
“Finance’s review concludes that PwC has made substantial progress in implementing governance, accountability and cultural reforms, along with improved risk and conflict management systems,” Windeyer said on Thursday.
“Advice received from the Australian Federal Police regarding the status of their investigations into PwC is that investigations are related to former, and not current, employees/partners of PwC, and the timing of the outcome is unknown.
“Based on this, Finance has determined the ongoing investigations into PwC’s past actions does not prevent concluding this review and the fitness of PwC Australia to work with the Commonwealth in the future.”
Windeyer’s letter said the department’s 48 page report into PwC Australia and its findings would be published on 25 July. But the report, also seen by Guardian Australia, has not yet been made public.
A spokesperson for the finance minister, Katy Gallagher, said the minister was seeking feedback from senators involved in parliamentary inquiries into PwC Australia before the outcome of the department’s review was finalised.
“This period of consultation is ongoing and the report will be finalised after any feedback or other relevant information has been received and considered,” the spokesperson said.
The Australian federal police has confirmed it is still investigating how confidential Treasury information about draft taxation was shared by a former PwC Australia partner to win private sector work overseas.
AFP officers conducted a search of PwC Australia’s headquarters in November in relation to the scandal. The police investigation, dubbed Operation Alesia, is examining whether former PwC Australia staff committed a crime by disclosing official secrets.
The finance department’s decision is likely to be criticised by two senators who led parliamentary inquiries into the consultancy firm’s alleged conduct – Greens senator Barbara Pocock and Labor senator Deborah O’Neill – who have said previously they do not believe the ban should be lifted until the police investigation is concluded.
Finance’s decision is expected to be seen as an endorsement of the measures PwC Australia has put in place since the scandal decimated its reputation and income from government contracts. The company is not expected to resume tendering for government work, having sold its advisory business.
PwC Australia has argued the firm’s culture, internal processes and governance have been significantly overhauled since the damaging scandal.
Before Guardian Australia revealed the decision, O’Neill said she strongly stood by her recommendation that “PwC Australia cannot be allowed to tender again for government services until – at the very least – all investigations into its conduct are complete”.
Pocock issued a similar statement in early July, saying any green light from the finance department would send “precisely the wrong signal” about the consequences of breaching confidentiality provisions.
