It’s the ultimate conflict of interest: governments accused of corruption in Australia can stop funding the very organisations tasked with investigating said corruption.
Such is the funding model for integrity bodies across the country. And it’s a conflict our governments appear to have no problem abusing.
Take Victoria. The ombudsman Deborah Glass has accused the Andrews government of not providing enough funding for the integrity watchdog to perform its core duties — something she says could be perceived to be undermining the agency.
Glass so happens to be investigating alleged branch stacking by Victorian Labor MPs and a former Andrews minister Adem Somyurek.
But she’s not the first watchdog in the state to raise funding concerns. Robert Redlich QC, commissioner of Victoria’s Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC), said in July that a shortage of resources could hamper its ability to complete a growing list of tasks — one of which is another investigation into the branch-stacking scandal.
And it’s not just Victoria seemingly trying stamp out accountability from the source.
As Crikey reported in October, the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) pleaded with Premier Gladys Berejiklian for extra funding — at the same time it was investigating her secret relationship with former MP Daryl Maguire.
She was not forthcoming. The commission warned that if it did not receive more money it would be forced to reduce the organisation to its smallest size in its 30-year history.
Also in October, the federal government slashed $14 million from the budget of the Australian National Audit Office, the agency that has uncovered some of the biggest corruption scandals this year, including sports rorts and the Leppington Triangle deal.
Starving a watchdog meant to investigate your government’s misconduct undermines the independence of that organisation. That’s something the NSW government knows well, with a report by Auditor-General Margaret Crawford last month finding the current funding model threatened the ability of agencies to do their job.
But with scandal after scandal emerging, thanks largely to the work of the agencies, surely that’s the point?
What is the point of commisions and the like when nothing comes out of any misdeeds that they find?
BTW, Slightly off topic, but how about the findings of the inquiry into the bushfire started by that Army helicopter?
The chopper landed for “a short break”, somebody needing a peetree or lavatree perhaps.
The chopper landing light sets fire to the grass and starts a fire eventually causing fatalities and property loss.
The chopper jockey takes off rapidly when they finally notice their arse is on fire.
They call a Pan Pan message on the radio notifying of aircraft damage, but despite having a working radio and the mike in their hand do not tell anyone about the bushfire, now well alight and blown everywhere, from the takeoff downwash.
45 Min. later they land at base and tell someone about the fire!
During this time the Firefighters were trying to find the fire, and had they been alerted earlier could possibly have limited it’s spread.
What does the Minister of Defense ond other “authorities” say about all this?
“THEY DID NOTHING WRONG AND WERE CONCERNED FOR THE SAFETY OF THE AIRCRAFT”.
What a load of BS.
They could have advised the fire over the radio. They could have said that they saw it and not even admitted they started it. Giving time for the Military and Pollie spindoctors time to come up with some cover bullshirt.
It would seem someone very important was flying that chopper, and or the ADF were panic stricken at the thought of compensation likely to result.
Now just suppose where would you or I be had we accidentally caused that fire, I’ll bet we would have bars on our window.
“What is the point of commisions and the like when nothing comes out of any misdeeds that they find?”
I’ve been wondering that as well. If they did not exist very little would change – though let’s not ignore their occasional successes. Still, why not save a few dollars by abolishing them all?
I think the answer is that the various governments do not much enjoy the public clamour to set up a corruption commission that erupts when there is none. So the aim is to have a facade carrying the name “corruption commission”, and maybe even a handful of tame inquiries into matters that don’t worry the government, but no more. That should be enough to muddy the waters and put off most of the demands for a real corruption commission, and it can be given the blame for not doing something when the public moans about some scandal. Call it ‘striking the right balance’. Christian Porter is trying to go one better with his federal corruption commission, which would provide a means for corrupt politicians to control the scope and bury the findings of investigations into their own conduct. So Porter’s new model commission is actually designed to facilitate corruption rather than combat it. It’s rather clever.
The rest of your post is not ‘slightly off topic’. It is completely irrelevant, without any connection at all to the funding of corruption commissions.
Well I got it off my chest anyway.
Look on the bright side. At least we know now that our mighty military eventually notice when their back end is on fire.
Probably only noticed when the aircraft fire alarm sounded
“the war on accountability”, says the headline. Nonsense. There is no war, that would require somebody fighting back to defend accountability. What we have is a massacre. Accountability is being cleansed from the system, hunted down without mercy, corralled and beaten to death.
Funding for all Corruption Watchdogs, Audit Offices and Ombudsman Offices should be set as a percentage of overall state and federal budgets. I envisage it working similar to an insurance premium.
Set as a fixed percentage, by legislation.
Their budgets are already a percentage of the overall budgets, the problem is the percentages keep varying, downwards.
Funding for these watch dogs need to be allocated independently and monitored by an independent Board that is not selected by governments. This includes not only ICAC, of which a Federal body is urgently needed, but also the Auditors, ASIC and increases applied for when cases begin to overload the system. I think the same should be said for our National Broadcaster where they can do investigative journalism and report matters of National interest without fear or favour. If this happens then politics all round will be cleaned up sufficiently not to cost so much in the long run
Try not to be too ironic, it can normalize the evil