Key crossbenchers in the Senate have said government delays to the proposed anti-corruption commission mean there is little chance it will be established before the next federal election.
The government is facing early and heated criticism from the crossbench for its draft Commonwealth Integrity Commission model, including from Jacqui Lambie, Rex Patrick, and Centre Alliance’s Stirling Griff, who could play a crucial role in its passage through the Senate.
The Coalition released the draft legislation this week, almost two years after it began preparatory work. It has sat on the draft for months, blaming the pandemic, and missed repeated self-imposed deadlines to produce the document.
The draft prompted renewed criticism over the proposed commission’s inability to hold public hearings into government corruption, its reliance on a narrow definition of corruption, the lack of any power to make corruption findings, and the high threshold required for investigations to begin.
The government’s proposal is now out for consultation for six months until March.
But senators Patrick and Griff have both warned it is unlikely the commission will be operational in time for the 2022 election, as has the Greens leader in the Senate, Larissa Waters.
Patrick, an independent, said the legislation would need to be redrafted following consultation. It would then need to be introduced to the House, go through a Senate committee process, and then be passed through the Senate, all before work actually begins in hiring staff and selecting commissioners.
“I’m of the view that the timeframe is deeply disappointing,” Patrick told the Guardian. “We won’t see an Icac set up this side of the election, because it’s not just the six-month consultation.”
Griff said the draft bill would require “significant review and consultation” before Centre Alliance locked in its final position.
“It is out for six months of consultation, so it won’t see the light of day until next year at the earliest and given it has taken two years to get to this stage, I doubt it will even be introduced this side of the next election.”
Waters, also the Greens’ democracy spokeswoman, said the “toothless” commission ignored key concerns raised in earlier consultation, and appears designed simply to delay the creation of a genuine corruption watchdog.
“Even if the Coalition gets the votes it needs to pass this sham Icac, I don’t see it being set up before the next election,” she said.
“My bill for a federal watchdog with teeth passed the Senate last year. If the government called it on for a vote, concerns could be addressed and we could see an integrity commission in place by the end of the year. But this government will pull every trick in the book to avoid cleaning up its sideshow of scandals.”
Lambie is also strongly opposed to what she sees as a weak commission model.
She told the Guardian that the government appeared to be engineering a situation from which it could blame the crossbench and opposition for the legislation’s eventual failure.
“If the attorney general was serious about political corruption, he would put forward a serious bill on Icac,” Lambie said. “He doesn’t want this to pass. The Liberals won’t add the amendments that are needed to strengthen the bill, then they’ll blame the crossbench, Greens and Labor for not putting the bill through because the LNP doesn’t want to ever be put under the microscope for political corruption.”
It’s a view shared by Waters.
“The government knows its model doesn’t meet the minimum standards demanded by experts, the public and the crossbench,” she said. “This sham Icac is about politics, not policy. It’s designed to fail and for that failure to be blamed on those demanding a watchdog with actual teeth.”
The attorney general, Christian Porter, said he would be “consulting closely with crossbench members over the coming months”, noting their role would be critical to the passage of the complex and detailed legislation.
“That means listening to them and considering their views, but also trying to convince them that the model we have put forward is the fairest and most balanced approach, given the extraordinary coercive and investigative powers that the new body will hold,” Porter said.
But Porter said it would be disappointing if the crossbench were “so wedded to particular controversial ideas”, including the need for full public hearings or full retrospectivity, that they would block the passage of the legislation, which was already fully funded.
The Centre Alliance MP Rebekha Sharkie said it would be “pretty disappointing” if the government did not create a well-funded anti-corruption body with “wide-ranging ability to take referrals”.
“We’re obviously hoping for elements of the Helen Haines bill and will look to include some of those measures. Retrospectivity is important.”
Sharkie queried “what is the point of consultation if the government is not open to amendments”, after Porter said there were “certain matters of principle” on which it won’t compromise.
On public hearings, Sharkie said a model where the commission can hold “private and or public hearings” offers the “best of both worlds” – a repudiation of the government model for private hearings only into public sector integrity issues.
